Skip to main content

Full text of "Fish and Wildlife Management Report August 1, 1956"

See other formats










No. 30 



August 1, 1956 



FISH AND WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT 



REPORT 



PROVINCE OF ONTARIO 
DEPARTMENT OF LANDS AND FORESTS 
Division of Fish and Wildlife 



Hon. Clare E. Mapledoram 
Minister 



F.A. MacDougall 
Deputy Minister 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Page 

Deer Inventory, Sioux Lookout District, 1955 • 

- by J. A. Macfie 1 

Deer Range in Tweed District, 1955. 

- by P. A. Thompson 5 

The Western Region Deer Check Station. 

- by R. Boultbee 8 



Structure of the Deer Herd in Western Region. 

- by R. Boultbee 11 

Recuperative Powers of Western Region Deer Herd. 

- by R. Boultbee 16 

Mortality in the Western Region Deer Herd. 

- by R. Boultbee 20 

Deer and Elk Inventories, North Bay District, 1955. 

- by C. 0. Bartlett 24 

Deer Season in North Bay District, 1955. 

- by C. 0. Bartlett 28 

Some Distortions in Deer Kill Curves from Ontario. 

- by H. G. Lumsden 41 

Deer Inventory, District of Sault Ste. Marie, 1955. 

- by M. W. I. Smith 56 

Deer Survey, Sault Ste. Marie District, 1955. 

- by M. W. I. Smith 6l 

Elliott-Haynes Report. 66 



(THESE REPORTS ARE FOR INTRA-DEPARTMENTAL 
INFORMATION AND NOT FOR PUBLICATION) 



- 1 - 



DEER INVENTORY, SIOUX LOOKOUT DISTRICT, 1955 

by 
J. A. Macfie 



This is the first deer inventory to be compiled for the 
Sioux Lookout district. It must be emphasized that in places 
almost pure guess-work had to be employed. Since trappers 9 
estimates of deer population have never been collected here, and 
we have little other information on density, the work is very weak 
at this point. Hunter kill is harder to assess for deer than for 
moose, due to the fact that a large proportion of the deer licenses 
are sold by outside agencies. 

While the Sioux Lookout moose, caribou and wolf inventor- 
ies include in their coverage all the area north of the C.N.R. 
in the Western Region, the deer inventory deals with the Sioux 
Lookout forest district only. The Kenora inventory will include 
that part of Patricia West administered by them, putting the 
inventories in line with the deer checking station work. 

Deer Population in Decembers 1954 

In order to have a basis for a complete report for 1955; 
an inventory for the end of 1954 was compiled, and is included 
in this report. This was done by breaking down the band areas 
within the deer range to density zones varying from five deer per 
square mile to one deer per 10 square miles. A few more deer were 
added for areas of very low population. The resultant figure 
was 11,000 deer at the end of the 1954 hunting season. 

W olf Kill During the Winter of 1954-55 

Wolves were not particularly abundant, and snow conditions 
were in favor of the deer throughout the winter. The estimated 
kill of deer by wolves is 450. 

Other Losses During the Winter of 1954-55 

Snow was not excessively deep, and at no time was there 
a crust. Added to that, spring came early, so deaths due to 
starvation must have been few. An arbitrary figure of 150 deer 
is set for this loss. The Indian kill during the winter is assumed 
to have accounted for an additional 100 deer. 

1 955 Fawn Crop 

Age composition data obtained this year at the Fort 
Frances checking station and in the district revealed that 20% of 
the deer killed by hunters were fawns. When this factor is 
applied to the assumed spring population of 10,300 deer, it is 
indicated that 2,575 fawns reached the hunting season. The 
surviving fawn crop then added 25% to the spring population. 
Weather was favorable during the fawning season, so the original 
fawn crop could not have been much greater than 3,500. 



- 2 - 

Population in September, 1955 

The spring population of 10,300 deer, plus the net 
increment of 2,575 fawns adds up to 12,875 deer reaching the 
hunting season. Allowing for a summer loss of 75 deer from road 
and railway kills, etc., we then had 12,800 deer at the beginning 
of the hunting season. 

Hun ter Kill 

Non-resident g 

Non-resident hunters passing through the deer checking 
station killed 89 deer. In an incomplete canvass, tourist out- 
fitters reported 135 deer killed by non-residents from licensed 
camps. It is estimated that 200 deer in all were taken by non- 
residents. 

Residents ? 

Department offices in the district sold 210 resident 
deer licenses. Licenses sold by outside agencies in the district, 
and hunters who purchased licenses in other districts, are 
estimated to have brought the total of resident hunters to 1,000. 
Available license book covers show that 60% of 119 hunters who 
hunted in 1954 got a deer that year. Success this year is thought 
tc have been comparable to last year, so the resident kill in 1955 
may be placed at 600 deer. 

P o p ulation As Of November 25th. , 1955 . 

The September population of 12,800 deer, less the hunter 
kill of 800, leaves a population of 12,000, or 9% more than there 
were at the same time a year ago. 

ANNU AL INVENTORY OF DEER ON BAND AREAS 

District of Sioux Lookout 
Es timated Population on Band Areas For the Fiscal Year 1954-55 

Population on November 25th, 1955 • 

Banc 
Band Area (square miles) Deer 



Band Area 


(square miles) 


4,900 


6,400 


1,200 


4,600 


7,900 


6,100 



Red Lake 

Lac Seul 

Sioux Lookout P.W. 

Sioux Lookout South 

Savant-Armstrong- Auden 

Osnaburgh 

Pikangikum 4,900 

Rest outside main range 

TOTALS 36,000 12,000 



1,300 


6,900 


600 


2,600 


250 


75 


125 


150 



- 3 



ANNUAL INVENTORY OF DEER ON BAND AREAS 



Estimated Population on Band Areas 

Population of deer at the end of 1954 



District of Sioux Lookout 
For the Fiscal Year 1954 



Band Area 



Red Lake 

Lac Seul 

Sioux P. W. 
Sioux South 

Savant-Armstrong 

Auden 

Osnaburgh 

Pikangikum 

Rest 

TOTALS 



Area 



1/2 x 1200 sq. miles 
1/4 x 1200 
1/10 x 2500 

5 x S00 

1 x 2100 
1/10 x 3500 

2 x 200 
1/10 x 1000 

4 x 200 
2 x 550 
1/10 x 4000 



Deer 

600 
300 
250 

4,000 

2,100 

3 50 

400 
100 

600 

1,100 

400 

200 

50 

75 

125 

150 

11,000 



-4- 

I 



£-< 
O 
H 
P^ 
Bh 

co 

M 
Q 



O 
O 

o 
o 

CO 








CD 






H 






■H 


■p 




•2 


2 




CD 


o 




H CD 


V 

• — ^ 




•H ?H 


o 




g td 


o 




3 

CD O* 
in CO 


X 




ctf 


p 




2 h 


o 




CT 1 <D 


•H 




COP-, 


CO 




u u 


u 




Q) CD 


CD 




Ph CD 


0.) 


• 


Q 


O 


ur\ 


k -P 




LT\ 


CD Cvi a 


faDO 


CD 


£ rH 


£) o to 


•H 




•P r-O 


S 


<*> 


ua <i! 


O 


•p 


1 ft 


£1 


O 


CV !=) 1 


CO 


•H 






U 


1 1 CD 


Cj 


•P 


-P 


3 


CO 


£1 Ri' H 


H 


•H 


1 ^ 


Oh Q 


1 t^ 



- 5 - 
DEER RANGE IN TWEED DISTRICT, 1955 

by 

P c A. Thompson 



In this report the abundance of deer on the respective 
areas is based on the following? 

1. Inspection of deer yards during the winter of 1954-55* 

( a ) South Canonto Township, January 25th & 26th, 1955 • 

Deer were found to be concentrated in an area of 
approximately k to 6 square miles. No live deer were seen. The 
remains of two dead deer were found. There was no evidence to 
determine cause of death. Signs of heavy browsing was quite 
evident on what may be considered to be poor deer range. Deer 
of this area probably had a tough time surviving the winter, 

(b) Effingham Township, February 9th & March 23rd, 1955 . 

This wintering area covered approximately 8 square 
miles. Deer trails were easily travelled without the aid of 
snowshoes. Over most of the area deer were spreading out from 
the trails and browsing on cedar, red maple, mountain maple, 
striped maple, black ash, juneberry, dogwood, hemlock and in one 
instance, balsam. In all 28 deer were seen, 13 on February 9th 
and 15 on March 23rd. Deer of this area were browsing on good 
range and appeared to be in top physical condition. No drastic 
complications were anticipated. 

( c ) Sheffield Township, February 9th, 1955 . 

This area is situated south of #7 Highway, northeast 
of Erinsville, and covers an area of 5i square miles. An 
abundance of good browse was available. As no deer has wintered 
in this area for some years, no trouble was anticipated. 

(d) Lake Township, January 15th, 1955 « 

This area consisted of approximately 2 square miles 
and was patrolled by air only. Deer seemed to be wintering 
favourably. 

(e) Limerick Township, January 15th, 1955 . 

Deer were yarded in an area of approximately 5 square 
miles. No ground inspection made, but deer appeared to be in 
good condition. 

2. Aging data from deer checking stations? Barring weather 
conditions it seems quite reasonable to believe that the increase 
or decrease of a deer population is governed by the increase or 
decrease of the fawn production. Data collected from deer checking 
stations in the Tweed District over the past four years show that 
the fawn crop has increased by 9»8%. 



- 6 - 

Season Percentage of Fawns in Sample Taken 

1952 25.6% 

1953 29.6$ 

1954 31.5$ 

1955 34.4$ 

When information collected on the deer checking stations 
during the 1955 season is worked out by townships, it is quite 
evident that the townships with good winter range were responsible 
for the increase in fawn production. For comparison two groups 
of townships were formed. 

(a) In the townships of Herschel, Monteagle, Carlow, 
Faraday, Dungannon and Mayo, considered to have good winter deer 
range, 39% of the sample at checking stations were fawns. 

(b) In the townships of Matawatchan, Denbigh, Miller, 
Brougham, North Canonto and Blythfield, where the winter range is 
poor, only 22$ of the deer sampled at checking stations were fawns. 

3. Information on deer abundance supplied by hunters. 

4. Weathers Weather conditions during the winter of 1954-55 were 
undoubtedly severe enough to cause above average mortalities, 
especially in the lj year age class. However, these mortalitites 
seem to be localized to areas where winter range conditions are 
poor. 



- 7 - 



Deer Range in Tweed District, 1955. 




riTTI - 20 Deer per square mile. 

- l°-20 deer per square mile. 

- 2-10 deer per square mile, 2 Q 

tz 



- up to 2 deer per square mile. 
f i - absent. 



10 



M i 1 e s 

s 2 e 



Ap 



- s - 

THE WESTERN REGION DEER CHECK STATION 

by 
Re Boultbee 



This deer check station was started in 1953 and has 
been continued each hunting season since then. All three 
districts of the Western Region co-operate in operating the 
station. Animals are aged and sexed, and information on 
hunting success is gathered. Skill in aging deer is becoming 
well spread among the staff. 

The check station is probably unique in that it is 
located so as to see most deer leaving the Western Region in 
the possession of non-residents. This is due to the road system 
from the United States entering Canada at Fort Frances and 
spreading throughout the Western Region. The only other point of 
entry is the town of Rainy River and it is used much less than 
Fort Frances. 

The following table is a record of the number of 
animals inspected and aged in 1953* 1954* and 1955. 

Age Class 1953 1954 1955 

h 119 74 159 

lj 164 110 174 

2j 132 144 132 

34 72 64 134 

4| 33 21 62 

5§ 15 15 23 

6{ 12 17 16 

ll 10 12 16 

4 13 3 

9l 

TOTALS 5 53 460 774 

This table is the raw data and although it yields 
considerable information, it is not as useful as the table below 
in which the data is given in percentage form. An extra column 
is added showing the average percentages for the three years. 
Equal weight was given to all three years in making the last 
column. 



- 9 - 
A ge Class 1953 1954 1955 Three Years ' Average 

| 21.4 16.1 20.6 19.4 

it 29.4 23.9 22.4 25.2 

2§ 23.6 31.2 23.5 26.1 

3§ 12.9 13.9 17.3 14.7 

4§ 5.9 4.6 3.0 6.2 

5l 2.7 3.3 3.0 3.0 

6| 2.1 3.7 2.1 2.6 

7p 1.8 2cO 2ol 2.2 

Si 0.2 0.7 1.0 0.6 

9l 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 

TOTALS 100. Of 100. Of, 100. Of. 100. Of 

The last column is the important feature of the table. 
It is a standard to which all other items may be compared to 
establish their importance. Three years are a small basis to 
use for a standard but a survey of the three consecutive game 
check stations operated to date is necessary to prove their 
importance. The three year averages coupled with judgement can 
already be a valuable means to help us envisage our deer herd 
as it actually is, and this is the first requirement of sound 
management. If we patiently accumulate nine or ten years' data, 
the averages will be an unquestionable basis for judging the 
condition of the herd. There are already eleven fawn crops 
incorporated in the table but nine or ten years' data will 
follow that number of fawn crops from start to finish. Nine 
or ten years' data should also include a fair share of hard, 
ordinary, and good winters and should make the averages 
reasonably representative of normal conditions. 

The table of percentages can be used to judge the 
shape of the herd as found in the annual check, and also to 
follow the course of any one fawn crop. As an example of the 
first use it can be seen that the 1955 check does not deviate 
dangerously from the averages the fawn crop is normal" the next 
two year classes are a little below average, and the next two 
are a little above average. As an example of the second use, 
it can be seen that the 1952 fawn crop was and still is above 
average (29.4f compared to 25.2f in 1953 » 31. 2% compared to 
26. If in 1954, and 17. 3f compared to 14. 7% in 1955). No other 
fawn crop in the table was this strong. There is some indication 
in the table that the 1955 fawn crop is a fair one, but it still 
has to go through its first winter. At the time of writing, 
this winter has started with low temperatures and deep snow 
almost a month earlier than usual. 

The tying-in of game check station data with snow 
station data is plainly forseeable. In the next few years we 
will be able to say what constitutes a hard, ordinary or good 
winter and forecast its effect on the coming autumn's hunting 
season on the basis of past game checks. These two features, 



- 10 - 

combined with spot checks on browse and health conditions, will 
place us in a good position to manage the Western Region deer 
hunt with assurance. 

Our Western Region staff will realize that all the 
aforementioned techniques are now firmly within our experience. 
The remaining essential is the patience to gather a "few more 
years" data on which to base our judgements. 



- 11 - 



STRUCTURE OF THE DEER HERD IN WESTERN REGION 



by 
R. Boultbee 



Recently a paper to members of the staff of Western 
Region summarized the data of three consecutive years' game 
check stations on the deer hunt. The three years 9 data were 
averaged as follows in a percentage form? 



Age Glass 


Average 1953-54-55 


A 

7 f 

9l 


19o4 


25.2 


26.1 


14.7 


6.2 


3.0 


2.6 


2.2 


0o6 


0.0 



Total 100.0 



The averages serve as a standard with which to 
compare any one year's figures. After nine or ten years 
the averages should become quite reliable, and should 
represent normal conditions. 

It should be kept clearly in mind, however, that 
the averages represent an average sample of the deer kill. 
They are not a representative sample of the deer population. 
Nevertheless common sense tells us that the "kill" figures 
have a reasonably close relation to the herd as a whole. 

It is the purpose of this paper to work out some 
of the relationships between the average kill percentages 
and the percentages of a "normal" deer herd. 

Since the average "kill" percentages will in time 
include hard, ordinary and easy winters, it is reasonable 
to assume that they represent "middle of the road" or 
"normal" conditions. This is proper since we want a 
standard that we can work up or down from according to 
current conditions. Similarly, if we can draw conclusions 
from the "kill" figures about the herd as a whole, the 
latter will also represent a "middle of the road" or 
normal herd. 



- 12 - 

Foresters will recognize the comparison of a 
"normal" herd with a "normal" forest. Mr. Cringan employs 
the comparison on Page 29 of Fish and Wildlife Management 
Report Number 25« A normal forest is considered difficult 
to obtain but it appears to the writer that a deer herd 
would approach a "normal" state if it went through several 
similar seasons in succession. Under such stable living 
and mortality conditions, a normal herd should assume the 
following characteristics s 

1. The older the age class the smaller its numbers would 
be, until a zero point would be reached. 

2. Conversely, the younger the age class the larger its 
numbers would be. 

3. The fawn crop would be the largest age class in numbers. 
Theoretically, if all seasons were identical, the fawn 
crop would be the same in numbers each year, but this 

is a rather artificial requirement. 

It may be asked what is the use of a concept that 
can not be expected to occur in practice. The answer is 
that such a concept derived from a number of years 7 data is 
an accurate estimate of the Region's average deer potential. 
Over a number of years, if hunting pressure is properly 
managed, the herd would increase and decrease around an 
average condition represented by the concept of the "normal" 
herd. 

Wildlife workers will have most contact with kill 
data. It is important to visualize the herd from which the 
kill is obtained. The kill and the actual herd can be 
compared to the two sides of one coin. It is necessary to 
use the kill data to infer the state of the actual herd 
and this is where the "normal" herd concept is useful. 

Some of the calculations given below may be 
tedious but the conclusions are clear. Probably the best 
way to derive the "normal" herd proportions is to make a 
graph of the average kill percentages. This is done in 
Figure 1. 



FIGURE 1 



13 - 



P 
e 
r 
c 

e 
n 
t 

o 
f 

H 
e 
r 
d 



40-r 



30-- 



20 



10 







Age 



-•-2 

Class 



2* 



3 s h-z 



5h 



6h 



7h 



$h 



The dots on the 
line which fits in with th 
first three dots on the le 
impression at first glance 
first three dots may have 
also convey a strong impre 
of hunters. There appears 
fawns, and to concentrate 
information is gathered in 
selective hunting may be c 
it seems probable. If it 
this aspect of the hunt is 



right hand side form a descending 
e idea of a normal herd, but the 
ft certainly do not give this 

The seasons covered by these 
separated from average, but they 
ssion of selection on the part 

to be a tendency to shoot fewer 
on animals 2\ years old. As 

years to come, this idea of 
onfirmed or disproved. At present 
is true, then it can be said that 

a good conservation measure. 



If hunte 
follows that fawns 
herd, than indicat 
prefer 2j year old 
smaller proportion 
V/ith these thought 
through the dots o 
the proportions of 
See Figure 2. 



rs prefer not to shoot fawns, then it 
constitute a larger proportion of the 

ed by figure one. Similarly, if hunters 
deer, it follows that they occupy a 
of the herd than figure one shows. 

s in mind, the writer has drawn a line 

f the average kill, intending it to show 
the "normal" herd in Western Region. 



- 14 - 



FIGURE 2 




The curve has the necessary properties for a "normal" 
herd. The fawn crop in the largest age class (almost a third 
of the herd) and succeeding age classes are smaller. For 
those readers who are arithmetically minded it can be shown 
that the line passes very close to the averages obtained by 
grouping the dots in threes. For instance , the first three 
dots average 23«6 (19«4 plus 25.2 plus 26.1 divided by 3)« 
The line passes through the 1^ year age class at 23.2 which 
is very close to 23.6. The line passes just as close to the 
other dots if grouped in threes. In this respect, the line 
is consistent with the original data. It is also consistent 
in another respect since if the values for the line at each 
age class are added up they will be found to total 100 
percent, the same as the original data. 



The line for the "normal" herd of the Western 
Region is tabulated below. It should be remembered that the 
figures, like the kill data, only represent proportions 
expressed percent ically. We are not yet ready to say what the 
total numbers of the herd are, though such an estimate may 
come in time. It should also be kept in mind that the table 
is based on only three years ? data, and will be much more 
accurate when several more years 9 data are incorporated. This 
paper is really an assessment of the work done to date. 



- 15 - 



Age Glass 


Normal 


Herd Percentage 


i 

4? 

91 




30.4 




23.2 




17.5 




12.1 




7c7 




4.4 


* 


2.6 




1.5 




0.6 




0.0 



Total 100.0 



- 16 - 

RECUPERATIVE POWERS OF WESTERN REGION DEER HERD 

by 
R, Boultbee 



Two papers preceding this one have assessed the Western 
Region Deer Checking Station which has been operated for three 
successive seasons to date. The first paper averaged the data 
of all three check stations and established a standard to judge 
the meaning of data from future stations. The second paper used 
the check station data to estimate the inward proportions of the 
Western Region Deer Herd under stable living and mortality condi- 
tions. 

The present paper is intended to show how many seasons 
are required by the so-called "normal" herd of Western Region to 
recover a condition reasonably close to normal after a setback. 
A herd is subject to many kinds of setback. In a study of this 
kind it is necessary to choose a setback that lends itself to 
calculations, though it may not occur naturally in the chosen form. 
The setback chosen in this study is the loss of an entire fawn crop, 
without losses in the other age classes. This would be a very 
serious setback. A study of how the herd acts after such a setback 
should help us to judge what will happen under other situations. 

The proportions of the normal deer herd in Western Region 
were shown in the second paper to be as given in Table I. The third 
column is a new feature and shows the percentage of each age class 
that survives to the next year. For instance, the 2| year age 
class will be reduced from 17.5$ of the herd to 12.1$ at 3i years, 
a survival of 69.1$. 



Survival Rate in Per Cent 

76.3 
75.4 

69.1 
63.6 
57.2 
59.1 
57.7 
40.0 
0.0 



TABLE 


I 




Age CI 


ass 


Per Cent of Herd 


4 

3 

4| 

it 
7| 


30.4 




23.2 




17.5 




12.1 




7.7 




4*4 




2.6 




1.5 


4 

91 




0.6 




0.0 
■■«»» * — 



100.0 



If a fawn crop is wiped out there will be a "zero" age 
class which will take nine seasons to move through the herd and 
disappear. It may be assumed that normal proportions would be 
resumed soon after the zero age class disappears in the tenth 



- 17 - 

season. However, we would be satisfied if the herd approached 
reasonably close to normal proportions. By tabulating the herd 
in groups of three age classes we can see if the age classes 
accompanying the zero age class can help compensate for it. In 
Table II, a herd of one hundred deer in normal proportions is 
shown in groups of three age classes. The only exception is 
that the fawn crop is shown separate throughout and therefore 
only two age classes appear in the second group. The reader is 
asked to overlook the decimal portion of a deer that appears in 
each groups this is a privilege reserved for people who dabble 
in theories. 

The data of Table II are given again in Table III in 
percentage form. The column under "year zero" represents the herd 
before its setback and is the condition we hope to resume. Under 
"year one" the fawn crop is shown as wiped out. "Year Ten" 
represents the first year without a zero age class and the propor- 
tions are seen to correspond closely to those in "year zero". 
However, it can be seen that the proportions under "year five" are 
also quite close to those of "year zero", and so we conclude 
that the herd can recover its normal inward proportions in about 
five years. If the reader is satisfied to consider all adults as 
one group, then it can be said that the herd recovers its normal 
proportions in the third year when the fawn age class steadies 
down reasonably close to 30.4 per cent. 

The conclusion of this paper is therefore that the 
Western Region deer herd can recover its normal inward proportions 
in three to five years after a serious setback. This conclusion 
gives an idea of the vigour and adaptability of the herd. 

It would not be wise to accept this conclusion without 
considering some of the assumptions involved. 

The main assumption was the concept of a normal herd. 
This implies that a series of average seasons will bring about 
a herd of certain proportions and also a balanced state of factors 
such as browse, predation, disease, hunting pressure, and total 
numbers. In practice the herd would only be expected to increase 
and decrease around the normal state. 

Another assumption made is that normal conditions 
prevail for the three to five year period during which the herd 
resumes normal proportions. Even if the three to five year period 
is accompanied by average weather, the remaining factors could 
not remain normal. Browse would be more abundant, and predation 
and hunting pressures would be concentrated on the reduced numbers. 
If hunting pressure were lessened as a management measure to assist 
the herd a better than normal state would result. 

Thus it is clear that to speak of normal conditions 
after a serious setback is to assume an improbable theoretical 
state. It is still necessary to use experience and judgement in 
estimating what happens to the herd. But the theoretical recovery 
time of three to five years is a basis to work from according to 
observed conditions. 



- IS - 

A further assumption was made in applying the inward 
proportions of a normal herd to the one hundred deer of Table II. 
These proportions were not intended to apply to total numbers but 
it was necessary to use them in this manner to arrive readily at 
the percentages of Table III. It will be noted in Table II that 
the herd never increased its numbers after being reduced to about 
seventy in numbers. This is an artificial state caused by using 
data for the normal herd which by definition is stable in numbers. 
This does not prevent us from using the recovery period of three 
to five years as a basis to work from, but it does point up the 
need for us to find some means of estimating the actual numbers 
of the deer herd. This has been attempted with certain big game 
animals and there is no doubt that we can develop such a step with 
the deer herd if we try. 

It is not necessary to develop the subject of recupera- 
tive powers further but if any reader is interested in arithmetic 
he may wish to construct Table II for himself. This was done 
by first constructing a similar table for individual age classes 
and then grouping them as in Table II. The survival rates of Table 
I are needed for this step. The fawn crop for each year is found 
by totalling the adults for the previous year and allowing them 
fawns at the rate of 30.4 for every 69.6 adults. Anyone who wants 
to follow the subject can have a copy of the writer* s tables by 
writing for it. 





^ 


-CO H -4-vO 







cdC 


■ • • o 







0) r- 


H OOc^ 


rH 




!>H 


C\i Oi rH 


£> 




?H 


OCV UACV 


nO 




^^s 


■ OS* 


O 




CD°^ 


' H ONNo 


H 




iH 


NNH 


t>- 




Fh 


!>-cno2 CM 


-4- 




03 -co 

q-UU 


• ■ 


• 

rH 




fH 


CM CV H 


O- 




^ 


OCV U"\rH 


t>- 




^ r^ 


9 0*0 


• 


p. 


cdO- 


rH On to C\2 


rH 


o 
U 

o 


>H 


CV CM rH 


c- 








g 


J-f 


oo-o-o- 


o 


I§ 


^vO 
CD ^ 


• o 


• 


cd 


rH O^A-j- 


CM 


&H 


M 


CM CM rH 


t> 


On 








O 










rH 


O-O u-N£>- 


o 


03 


^ lrN 


O * 





CO 


CD 1 ^ 


H OnvO -4- 


H 


O 


fH 


CM CM H 


EN 


1 i-h 








ON !h 








rH cd 


h 


t» ONrH {>- 


m 


p 


cd . 


• o a a 


e 


1 <H 


CD "^ 


CM CM CM ^f 


CM 


«U 


M 


CM CNrH 


O- 


o 








o 








H 


rH 


CM CM CM O- 


O-N 




^^v 


« o c 





<H 


©**> 


O c^-J--^- 


CM 


o 


H 


CM CM CM 


O- 


T3 








h 








CD 


!h 


-^■UACNi [>- 


-00 


EC 


CD tv 


O 







Otxh-d- 


nO 


Sh 


>H 


C^rH CM 


o- 


CD 








(D 








Q 










Ih 


O £>CM ["- 


nO 


tH 


^H 


C 9 


• 


O 


Q)^ 1 


OO -4--J- 


ON 




J*H 


■4-CvJ 


NO 


>l 








h 








CD 








> 


fa 


-3-!>cm o 


o 


O 


cd _ 


o • e g 


• 


o 


CD ° 


OO -4--J- 


o 


CD 


rH 


o-N-4:C\i 


o 


1 


to 




H 


H 


CO 


HoMcvHcv 




H 


cd 


CM U-N-CO 






rH 




CO 


H 


O 


o o o 


hH 


khI 




p p p 


< 


PQ 


CD 




En 


<U 


bfl 


■H|C\H|OJH|CVH|W 


CD 


Eh 


< 


H ovO 


Eh 



CO 
CD 
W| 

cd 
p 

a 

CD 
O 

CD 

•H 

T3 

CD 
CO 
CO 


U 
&\ 

X 

H 

H 



CD 
rH 
,£> 

Cj 

E-i 

<H 
O 

cd 
p 
cd 
o 



Hi 

M 

m 

E-t 



cd9 

CD M 

rH 



In 

cd on 





H 

cdto 

CD 

r^ 



cd o- 

CD 
>H 



cdvO 
CD 
>H 



cd >-CN 
CD 

rH 



u 
cd^- 

CD 
>H 



u 

Cd fT> 
CD 



cd C\J 
CD 
>H 



CD 

N 



(h 

cd o 

CD 

r^ 



CO 

CO 

cd 
H 
o 

CD 
faO 



-^-4-cv o o 

o o o o e 

O O -4-lt\ o 

c^N-4-CV O 

H 



rYNt>-u^i-rN o 



O O <}--3- 
C^-4-CNi 


o 
o 

H 


• OS* 

O H -J--4" 

m-4-CNi 


o 



o 
o 



ua-co-co ON o 

o • b o a 

O O U-NCNJ O 

r^-4-(\2 O 

rH 



-4-c^n-Cxd LPs o 



O H rHvO 
r^-d/CN2 


O 
O 
H 


<N <r\CD "^ 

o o e o 

O O c^^O 
cn-ct-OvJ 


O 

e 

o 

o 



C"\ ir\ {>- »*r\ o 

• ooo a 

H !JAv0 NO O 

C^N-4- rH O 



O O UALT> O 

0* o 

tO OJ (V^vO O 

CV o^r<^ O 

H 



LTNtO LCNCNJ O 

oooo e 

0NO2 rH\0 O 

C^NCNj rv> O 



O >-r\[>--00 o 

oooo o 

OtO -j-vO o 

rH 



-ci-o-cNj r>- o 



O O -cf-4- 

c^-j-cv 



o 

o 



H|C\H|CVH|CV 




(N UTN-OO 






CO 


OOO 


l-H 


P P P 


< 




B^ 


|CVM|0H|fAH|N 


o 


rH mNO 


Eh 



20 



MORTALITY IN THE WESTERN REGION DEER HERD 



by 
Ro Boultbee 



This is the fourth in a series of papers showing the 
value of the deer checking stations operated for the past three 
years by the Districts of the Western Region. The second paper 
developed the percentage proportions of what was called the normal 
herd for Western Region. The word normal was defined as the 
average state of the herd over a series of good, ordinary and 
hard seasons and was assumed to represent the herd as it would 
be if stabilized. The results arrived at were based on only 
three years 9 data and the need for more years' data was pointed 
out. 

The normal herd was found to consist of successively 
smaller age classes, and under normal conditions the mortality 
rate for each age class was assumed to remain constant from 
year to year. Mortality, spread over the age classes, determines 
the proportions of the herd. It is the purpose of this paper 
to show the influence of mortality upon the herd in Western 
Region. 

The percentages of the Western Region normal deer 
herd are given in the first two columns of Table One. Column 
three gives the mortality rate percent ically for each age class. 
For example, the 2\ year age class occupies 17 • 5 per cent of 
the herd, but one year later it occupies only 12.1 per cent of 
the herd which means that the 2\ year age class suffers a 
mortality of 30.9 per cent in one year. Column four gives the 
per cent of the herd lost each year by age classes. For 
instance, 30.9 per cent of the 2j year age class is 5«4 per 
cent of the whole herd. 



TABLE I 














Age 


Normal Herd 


Age Class Mortal: 


Lty 


Herd 


Mortality 


Class 


in 


Per Cent 
30.4 


in Per Cent 




in 


Per Cent 


i 

4? 
7 


23.7 




7.2 




23.2 


24.6 






5.7 




17.5 


30.9 






5.4 




12.1 


36.4 






4.4 




7.7 


42. g 






3.3 




4o 4 


40.9 






1.8 




2.6 


42.3 






1.1 




1.5 


60.0 






0.9 




0.6 


100.0 






0.6 



100.0$ 30.4$ 



- 21 - 



Interest in Table One lies in the fourth column, 
which shows the distribution of mortality in one year over the 
various age classes. The total loss in one year is seen to be 
30.4 per cent of the herd or roughly one third. It is interes- 
ting to note that the total loss of 30.4 per cent in one year 
is identical with the annual recruitment of fawns. It is a 
necessary condition for a stabilized herd that the annual fawn 
crop balance the annual mortality. Thus, Table One confirms the 
figures for the normal herd. 



The next step is 
to those of the living herd 
be considered as normal and 
comparison, we need to plac 
on a similar basis. This i 
one hundred per cent basis 
final column of Table Two s 
1953, 1954 and 1955 express 
was developed in the first 



to compare the mortality proportions 
to discover what kind of losses can 
therefore safe. To make this 
e the figures for these two factors 
s best done by placing the two on a 
as in Table Two. In addition, the 
hows the average hunters 9 kill for 
ed percentically. The last column 
paper of this series. 



TABLE 


11 














Age 




Normal H< 


3rd 


Herd Mortality 


Hunters' Kill at 100% 


Class 




in Per Cc 


3nt 


at 


100% Level 


Level 


(3 Years' Avge) 


4 




30.4 






23.7 




19.4 




23.2 






IS. 7 




25.2 




17.5 






17. S 




26.1 


3 ? 




12.1 






14.5 




14.7 


41 




7.7 






10. g 




6.2 


5? 




4.4 






5.9 




3.0 




2.6 






3.6 




2.6 




lo5 






3.0 




2.2 


4 




0.6 






2.0 




0.6 



100. 



100. 



100. of. 



The information we want is in Table Two but it will be 
easier to visualize it if put in graph form. In studying the 
graphs it should be remembered that they only take account of 
relative shapes. In each graph two curves are compared on an 
equal footing, whereas if numbers were taken into account annual 
mortality would be considerably lower than the living herd, and 
.■the hunters' kill would be only a part of the annual mortality. 
The form of the graphs does not falsify the influences under 
study but makes them plainer to see. 



FIGURE I 



- 22 - 



r 
c 

e 
n 
t 



40 



30 



20 



10 




rmal Living 
rd 



Annual 
Mortality- 




Age Class 

Figure 1 compar 
Proportions o The "normal 
appears to be one in whic 
comparatively low, and th 
consistently high. This 
since it is too important 
However, the tendency is 
Assuming for the present 
management of hunting pre 
older animals o It would 
data before giving effect 
to think that Nature may 
measure in its pattern of 
well known that a strong 
existence in the herd and 
young age classes. 



es Herd Mortality to Normal Herd 
tj mortality pattern for Western Region 
h the proportion of young animals is 
e proportion of older animals rides 
conclusion is not positively stated 

to accept on only three years 9 data, 
pronounced enough to seem probable, 
that it is correct, the key to the 
ssure may be to direct it towards the 
be wise to gather several more years ? 

to this principle. It is interesting 
have incorporated a conservation 

herd survival and mortality. It is 
age class shows up throughout its 

this is one effect of low mortality in 



It only remains to compare the hunters' kill to normal 
mortality. This is done in Figure 2. Assuming for the present 
that three years 9 data are a suitable basis, it appears that 
the hunters' kill is notably unfavourable to the normal pattern 
of conserving the younger age classes. Fawns may be an 
exception. 



- 23 - 



FIGURE II 



40 



P 
e 
r 

c 

e 
n 

t 



30 



r Hunters ? Kill 
(3 years' avge) 




Age Class 



If time proves the last finding to be true it will 
eventually have to be taken into account. The fact that no 
adverse effect has yet been detected may mean that the hunt is 
not yet heavy enough to take effect. For the present, it is 
wisest to merely take notice of the tendencies that appear from 
this paper and keep them in mind till they can be proven or 
disproven. This brings us back to the original purpose of this 
series of papers which is to point out the wealth of information 
that is starting to come from our deer checking stations. This 
information will throw much light on the herd as it exists in 
Western Region and point up the management measures that must be 
taken. It is necessary to continue accumulating deer checking 
station data each year. 



- 24 - 
DEER AND ELK INVENTORIES - NORTH BAY DISTRICT, 1955 

by 
CO. Bartlett 



Elk ; 

Consequent to our letter to you on February 9th in which 
we summarized the status of elk herds in the North Bay district 
we have received only two reports on elk in the period from 
February 9th to November 25th. 

The first report (No. 1 on the attached map) was reported 
by the driver of the City Bakery truck. He observed an elk on 
Highway #63 between the Little and Big Jocko Rivers on June 25th, 
1955- This animal was limping badly. 

The second report (No. 2 on the attached map) was a 
report received from a hunter, Mr. R. Lansborough, London, Ontario, 
who passed through the deer checking station at Gravenhurst. 
Hunters at Poplar Hill Camp near Koko Lake in French Township 
operated by Mr. Pat Kikley, Welland, Ontario, estimated that there 
were forty elk in the immediate vicinity of Koko Lake. We doubt 
if there were forty elk; however the report suggests that there is 
still a small herd of elk in this general area. 

The third report is one that we did not include in our 
report to you on February 9th. Conservation Officer W. J. St. 
Pierre saw elk tracks in November of last year in Olrig Township 
three miles northeast of Gauvreau Lake. 

A fourth report, not in the North Bay district, was 
received from a hunter at Gravenhurst who saw an albino elk south 
of Lake Nipissing during the 1955 hunting season. He was unwilling 
to disclose the exact location to us but indicated he was going to 
report it to Dr. Harkness. 

In summary there appears to be a few elk remaining in 
scattered herds in the Jocko River watershed. These presumably 
are the remnants of the original herd of fifty animals that were 
located at the North Bay hatchery in 1950. We doubt if the 
present population exceeds our estimate of fifteen animals made 
in 1954. 

Deer ; 

The following are our impressions of deer herd conditions 
in the North Bay district gained largely from the information 
obtained from hunter check cards and deer camp reports during the 
1955 open season for deer. What follows is simply a summary; for 
more detailed information may we refer you to our deer season report 
of December 20th and our report of January 17th on accidental kills 



- 25 - 

in the North Bay district during the calendar year 1955. 

The age class composition of the deer kill during the 
1955 season indicates that there was no abnormal mortality of 
deer herds in the French and Mattawa River watersheds during the 
winter of 1954-55 • The shortage of the animals in the 1^ year 
class in our sample from the Marten River and Temagami areas 
suggests that a number of the 1954 fawn crop did not get through 
the winter. 

This above normal mortality in the northern areas of 
the district appears to be related to winter conditions which were 
more severe in that area during the winter of 1953-54 than in the 
southern parts of the district. More detailed investigations of 
deer yards and deer range conditions are contemplated for these 
areas. 

There were 69 accidental kills during the calendar 
year 1955 which is considerably higher than the 39 killed in the 
calendar year 1954* This difference is partially a reflection 
of better reporting of deer kills by Conservation Officers. 

Two of the 17 yearling does examined at the checking 
stations in the North Bay district were milking indicating that 
some does were bred as fawns during the 1954 breeding season. 
This and the percentage of fawns in the total kill (29.2) suggest 
that the deer herd generally is reproducing satisfactorily. 

We have attached a map showing three general levels 
of deer abundance in the North Bay district. These divisions 
were obtained from (1) the deer checking station cards on the 
basis of the number of man days required to take a deer in each 
of the townships in the district and (2) the distribution and 
intensity of the kill in the various townships indicated by the 
deer camp reports. In only two townships, Grant and Strathy, did 
the reported kill exceed 1 deer per square mile. The kill in 
the 39 townships for which reports are available, averaged 0.3 
deer per square mile. 

The division is based on a rather small sample for 
each township and should be considered as tentative. As more and 
better information becomes available a more accurate division 
will be possible. 



- 26 - 



NORTH BAY DISTRICT 




Kattawa 



Plan Showing 6 Distribution 

of Elk in the North Bay District 

February 28, 1956. 



M i 1 e s 
20 10 



% 



40 



NORTH BAY DISTRICT 



- 27 - 




tawa 



Plan Showing Distribution 
of Deer in the North Bay- 
District, November, 1955* 

tUn up to 2 dear per square mile. 
2-10 deer per square mile. 
10-20 deer per square mile. 



20 

fc 



10 

trrTrl 



M i .1 e s 
20 



40 



- 28 - 

DEER SEASON IN NORTH BAY DISTRICT, 1955. 

by 
CO. Bartlett 



Summary of Hunter Success 

Separate summaries are available for (1) Gravenhurst 
(2) all stations other than Gravenhurst and (3) all stations. 
This was necessary to compare statistics obtained this year with 
those obtained last year at Gravenhurst. In comparing these you 
will notice that there is very little difference both in the 
number of resident and non-resident hunters checked and their 
success. Non-resident hunter success this year is slightly 
higher this year than last, although with the small number of 
such hunters checked, it is doubtful if this represents a 
significant difference. 

The statistics gathered at stations located in the 
North Bay district show that hunter success, especially resident 
hunter success, was considerably lower than that recorded at 
Gravenhurst. An examination of the accompanying Table I 
indicates that two factors are responsible for this. These are 
(1) Considering casual and local hunters as one group and 
organized and guided hunters as another, the casual and local 
hunter group with their low hunter success represent 64 percent 
of all hunters checked at stations located in the North Bay 
district. At Gravenhurst they represent only 25 percent of 
total North Bay hunters checked (2) The low hunter success of the 
casual and local group checked in the North Bay district. This 
low success is influenced to some extent by the fact that many 
hunters in this particular group were not finished hunting for 
the season when checked . However, it is significant that the 
number of man-days required for them to bag a deer was roughly 
the same for both the Gravenhurst and North Bay stations or in 
the order of thirty man-days. 

It is significant also that with the variation in the 
hunter success figures between all hunters checked at Gravenhurst 
and all hunters checked in the North Bay district, the effort 
required to bag a deer was the same at both places or twenty 
man-days. 

As expected the organized and guided hunters as a group 
were consistently more successful than the local and casual 
hunter group. Although the success for the local and casual 
hunter group checked in the North Bay district is low for the 
reasons indicated above, it and the Gravenhurst figures (which 
probably represent the maximum) indicates that the over-all 
success of such hunters lies somewhere between these two extremes 
of 5 and 20 percent. In no case where more than 100 hunters 
were checked was the success of the guided and organized hunter 
group below 20 percent; the average being 24.2 percent. 



- 29 — 

The results of this year's classification of hunters 
points out quite conclusively that there is considerable varia- 
tion in the hunters success of the different hunter groups. 
Unless checking stations are so situated as to sample each of 
these groups in the proportions that they exist in the total 
hunter population, they do not represent the over-all hunter 
success picture. They may provide an index to success if we 
assume that the representation of the different hunter groups in 
the sample is the same every year. An endeavour should be made 
to locate checking stations in areas where a good sample of each 
one of the particular hunter groups can be obtained. The 
emphasis, however, should still remain on obtaining sexes, ages 
and weights of deer killed and other biological criteria that 
reflect range conditions. Consideration should also be given 
to the enforcement and public relations values to be derived 
from these same locations. 



- 30 - 



DEER SEASON - 1955 



Summary of Hunter Success 



District of North Bay 
(Total for all stations) 



Numbers of Hunters Checked 

(a) Resident Hunters 

(b) Non-resident Hunters .... 

(c) Total 



ooc.o»eo»oaoceco»o 



I960 

214 

2174 



2. Numbers of Deer Checked 



(a) Shot by Resident Hunters 

(b) Shot by Non-Resident Hunters ... 



0<SOOOOO«0 



\ C j 1 OLdl •••oooo«oo90«oe«cooeoo»o»o«*eoee»e«« 

3. Success 

(a) Percentage Success of Resident Hunters . 

(b) Percentage Success of Non-resident 

Hunters 



(c) Percentage Success of all Hunters 

(d) Total Man-Days of Hunting 

(e) Man-Days per deer 



ooo©ooooo»qooo 



oo«ooe*oooo«*ooo 



236 

93 

329 



12.0 

43.5 
15.1 
6761 

20.5 



- 31 - 
DEER SEASON - 1955 

Summary of Hunter Success 



District of North Bay 
(Hunters checked at Gravenhurst) 



1. Numbers of Hunters Checked 

(a) Resident Hunters ...» o 245 

(b) Non-resident Hunters <> o o <> 46 

\ C ) 1 OL d J_ c»fo#ooooooeooooooooooooooooo«oooo ^ /J- 

2. Numbers of Deer Checked 

(a) Shot by Resident Hunters «, , ,. 64 

(b) Shot by Non-resident Hunters ...... 25 

^ C j 1 ObdX o©ooo«oo«ooo»oo»»oooooo»eoooc«»to* Q ;7 

3 o Success 

(a) Percentage Success of Resident Hunters •. 26.1 

(b) Percentage Success of Non-resident 

Hunters 54.3 

(c) Percentage Success of all Hunters 30.6 

(d) Total Man-Days of Hunting 1791 

(e) Man-Days per deer 20.2 



- 32 - 

DEER SEASON - 1955 

Summary of Hunter Success 



District of North Bay 
(Stations other than Gravenhurst) 



1. Numbers of Hunters Checked 

(a) Resident Hunters • . ■ • ■ « 1715 

(b) Non-resident Hunters •• 168 

\ C j 1 OLul ooo«do*«oo««ce«ooeo«o«oo6»oooc*o«9o i.OO^ 

2. Numbers of Deer Checked 

(a) Shot by Resident Hunters . .. ....... 172 

(b) Shot by Non-resident Hunters 68 

\ C ) 1 OL a JL ...... *0....c...««.....e.o..»e.e..s C*-jA 

3. Success 

(a) Percentage Success of Resident Hunters . . 10.0 

(b) Percentage Success of Non-resident 

(c) Percentage Success of all Hunters ....... 12.7 

(d) Total Man-Days of Hunting ......... 4970 

(e) Man-Days per deer ....... 20.7 



- 33 - 



TABLE I - A comparison of the hunter success of (a) organized 
and guided hunters and (b) local and casual hunters 
represented in a sample of 1824 resident hunters 
checked at Gravenhurst and at checking stations 
located in the North Bay district, November, 1955 



(a) 



Location of 
Station 


Total 

Hunters 

337 


Total 
Hunter 
Days 

1490 


Total 
Deer 

80 


Hunter-days 
Per Deer 

18.6 


Percent 
Success 


Cooks Mills 


23.7 


Highway 64 


171 


821 


42 


19.5 


24.6 


Highway 63 


46 


117 








Others (5) 


27 


234 


5 


46.8 


18.5 


Gravenhurst 


143 


£97 


48 


18.7 


33.6 


TOTAL 


724 


3559 


175 


20.4 


24.2 



(b) 



Cooks Mills 


487 


497 


13 


38.2 


2.7 


Highway 64 


249 


344 


12 


28.6 


4.8 


Highway 63 


302 


390 


12 


32.5 


4.0 


Others (I) 


13 


66 


3 


22.0 


2.3 


Gravenhurst 


49 


293 


10 


29.3 


20.4 


TOTAL 


1100 


1590 


50 


31.8 


4.5 



(K) Arnprior, Sudbury, Lindsay district 



- 34 - 

Age Class Distribution 

In addition to an age class summary for all North 
Bay deer checked (341) we have included summaries of age classes 
represented in samples obtained at Gravenhurst and stations other 
than Gravenhurst which includes those located in the North Bay 
district, Arnprior, Sudbury and Lindsay districts. 

In the overall classification for the district a 
shortage of animals in the lj year old class is indicated for 
both bucks and does. It is somewhat more pronounced for does. 
Although the samples are small, this shortage of animals in the 
1^ year old class is evident in both the Gravenhurst and Cooks 
Mills samples (Table II). Deer from the Martin River area, 
Temagami and other points north are represented in the Cooks 
Mills sample. They suggest a more than normal mortality in the 
1954 fawn class. This shortage of lj year old class is not 
apparent in the samples obtained in the southeastern and south- 
western portions of the district adjoining the French and Mattawa 
Rivers (classified as others in Table II). 

A more thorough analysis of the data by townships and 
an analysis of snow conditions in the district during the winter 
of 1954-55 should help to isolate the factors responsible for 
this increased mortality. 

Last year the 4j year old age class was not represented 
in our sample of 82 deer checked at Gravenhurst. The shortage 
of animals in this particular year class is reflected again 
this year by the shortage of 5j year old deer in our sample. 
Only 2 of the 197 adult deer aged were in this age class. 

We would like very much to check back through previous 
samples of North Bay deer checked at Gravenhurst to see if the 
shortage of this year class is evident in the age class distribu- 
tion of deer sampled in the period from 1950 to 1953 inclusive. 



- 35 - 

TABLE II - Comparison of age class composition of North Bay 
district deer checked at Gravenhurst, Cooks Mills 
and other checking stations located in the North 
Bay district. 



i£e_ 



Bucks 



Does 



ii 

3i 
4i 

5i 

5i ♦ 

Number of 
deer in 
Sample 



Graven- Cooks 
hurst Mills Others 



34.6 

34.6 

26.9 

3.3 



26 



30.6 

33.4 
21.2 

7.7 

1.9 
52 



44.2 
25.6 

23.3 

4.6 

2.3 

43 



Graven- Cooks 
hurst Mills Others 



23.0 


23.5 


41.4 


15.4 


38.2 


31.0 


30.8 


29.4 


13.8 


15.4 


5.9 


6.9 
3.5 


15.4 


2.9 


3.5 



13 



34 



29 



ft Variations in age class composition could be due to the very 
small sample obtained. 



- 36 - 

DEER SEASON - 1955 

Age-Class Distribution 



District of North Bay- 



Total Deer Checked 341 

Adult Bucks 143 

Adult Does 90 

Buck Fawns 55 

Doe Fawns 41 

Unaged and Unsexed 12 



Percentage of Deer Checked 



Adult Bucks 43 - h-% 

Adult Does 27.4$ 

Total Fawns 29.2$ 



Percentages of Adult Deer in Each Age Class 



Age. 



li 

2i 

3i 

4i 

5i 

6i) 

7i> 

ai)5i * 
) 

9i> 
10* j 

TOTALS 

UNAGED 

GRAND 
TOTAL 



Bucks 



No. of Percent 
Deer of Total 



44 

40 

23 

7 



121 
26 

147 



36.4 

33.0 

23.2 

5.3 

0.3 



0.3 



100,0 



Does 



No. of Percent 
Deer of Total 



23 

24 

13 

6 



76 
22 

93 



30.3 
31.6 

23.7 
7.9 
1.3 



5.3 



100.0 



Sexes Combined 

No. of Percent 
Deer of Total 



67 
64 
46 

13 
2 



34.0 

32.5 

23.3 

6.6 

1.0 



2.5 



197 99.9 
43 

245 



- 37 - 

DEER SEASON 1955 

Age-Class Distribution 



District of North Bay 
(Hunters checked at Gravenhurst) 



Total Deer Checked $Q 

Adult Bucks 33 

Adult Does 19 

Buck Fawns 21 

Doe Fawns 13 

Unaged and Unsexed ...... 3 



Percentages of Deer Checked 

Adult Bucks 38.4% 

Adult Does 22.1$ 

Total Fawns 39.5% 



Percentages of Adult Deer in Each Age Class 



Age 



Bucks 



No. of Percent 
Deer of Total 



Does 



No. of Percent 
Deer of Total 



1J 

4 



3* 



4g 

5ft 

7ft 

9i| 
10JJ 

TOTALS 
UNAGED 



9 
9 
7 
1 



34.6 

34.6 

26.9 

3.3 



3 
2 

4 
2 



23.0 

15.4 
30. 3 

15.4 



15.4 



26 

9 



GRAND TOTAL 35 

Average Age of 
Adult Bucks 2.5 



99.9 13 

7 

20 



100.0 



Average Age of 
Adult Does 3.7 



Sexes Combined 

No. of Percent 
Deer of Total 



12 

11 

11 

3 



30. 8 

23.2 

28.2 

7.7 



5.1 



39 100.0 

16 

55 

Average Age of 
all Adults 2.9 



Brief Description of weather during the Season - Week Nov. 1-5 
- all good hunting days - lots of water in bush - dogs not too 
successful m routing deer from swamps - many dogs lost 
Week Nov. 6-12 - Rain on one day, otherwise all good hunting days. 
Light snow on morning of Nov. 7, good tracking, fnow departfd by 

(rlinef^lf h«v?° V- ^l a *4 g °° d hun * in ? **** exc ^ ^^sday 
fn? 1 ^!. a ii day) snov ? T d Wednesday night (5-6 inches) and remained 

n wi Se f n \ We ^ N °^ 2 °- 25 " M0re snow on Nov - 20th. 
f v n Wednesday, turned cold Wednesday night, crust on remaining 
<• udys, very noisy. 



- J0 • 

DEER SEASON 1955 

Age-Class Distribution 



District of North Bay 
(Hunters checked at stations 
other than Gravenhurst) 



Total Deer Checked 252 Percentages 

Adult Bucks 110 

Adult Does 71 Adult Bucks 

Buck Fawns 34 Adult Does 

Doe Fawns 25 Total Fawns 

Unaged and Unsexed 9 

Percentages of Adult Deer in Each Age Class 

Age Bucks Does 

No. of Percent No. of Percent 
Deer of Total Deer of Total 

lj 35 36.5 20 31.7 

2^ 31 32.6 22 34.9 

3i 21 22.1 14 22.2 

tf 6 6.3 4 6.3 

5s 1 1.1 1 1.6 

w 

71 

5J)5i f 1 1.1 2 3.2 

9*1 

104) 

TOTALS 95 100.0 63 99.9 

UNAGED 17 15 

GRAND 
TOTAL 112 7^ 

Average Age of Average Age of 
Adult Bucks 2.6 Adult Does 2.7 



of Deer Checked 



.0...... 



. 45.2$ 
. 29.2$ 
. 25.5$ 



Sexes Combined 



No. of 


Percent 


Deer 


of Total 


55 


34.5 


53 


33.5 


35 


22.1 


10 


6.3 


2 


1.3 



1.9 



155 99.9 
32 

190 

Average Age of 
all Adults 2.6 



- 39 - 

Weights 

Weights are available for 79 bucks and 4$ does. Only 
6 of these were obtained at Gravenhurst, with the majority 
obtained at Crystal Falls (63) and Cooks Mills (46) in the North 
Bay district. 

The checking stations set up in the district have a 
number of advantages over such stations at Gravenhurst in 
obtaining deer weights. At the local stations more time is 
available to weigh deer and they are usually transported loose 
in the vehicle. In comparison there is less time to weigh deer 
at Gravenhurst, where on busy days there is a large number of 
hunters waiting to be checked. In a great many cases their deer 
are either tied securely to the car or covered with camp 
equipment. 

We would be very interested in knowing how our weights 
compare with Parry Sound and Pembroke deer. 

Violations 

Ten violations of The Game and Fisheries Act were 
recorded at the checking stations operated in the North Bay 
district and charges laid in nine cases. Three hunters were 
charged with transporting a deer without a tag attached 
(Section 63, sub-section 1(a); Section 65* sub-section 2), three 
had no licences (Section 7, sub-section 1; Section 11, sub- 
sections 1 and 4 ? a v )> two were carrying loaded fire-arms in a 
vehicle (Section 53, sub-section l ? a ? )> and one hunter was 
transporting two deer with only one licence (Section 31 > sub- 
section 1). This represents roughly one violation for every 
two hundred hunters checked. 

The operation of the checking stations was publicized 
in the local newspapers and many hunters knew where and when 
the stations were in operation. This, no doubt, helped to 
prevent a number of violations, although with no information 
of this available for past years it is not possible to measure 
this year their overall effect on violation prevention. 

Comments and Suggestions 

Many complaints were received concerning the form of 
this year's licence. The most common complaint was that the 
tag attached to the carcass pulled apart when wet and could 
easily become lost in transportation. We noticed at the 
checking stations that a great number of tags came off the 
carcasses when they were handled for weighing, aging, etc. 
Others complained that they were too bulky and could not be 
folded to fit in their shirt or pants* pocket. Some more 
research work should be done to improve on this year's licence. 



- 40 - 

Some confusion existed this year among our staff at 
the checking stations in the use of the letter "R" for classify- 
ing local residents. Some of them, although instructed otherwise, 
interpreted it according to The Game and Fisheries Act. To 
avoid this in future years we suggest that the the letter "L" 
be used to designate "locals" in place of the letter "R". 

Many organized camps employed a guide and it was not 
always possible to classify the organized and guided hunters 
correctly. In all cases we classed organized camps with guides 
as organized although I doubt if this system was followed 
throughout «. For next year, if there isn't too large a discre- 
pancy between the success of this year's guided and organized 
hunters, it may be desirable to classify them as one group 
(organized) . 



- 41 - 



SOME DISTORTIONS IN DEER KILL CURVES FROM ONTARIO 



by 

H. G. Lumsden 



If the age and sex composition of a wildlife population 
can be determined by adequate random sampling much can be understood 
concerning its status and the nature of the mortality factors 
operating upon it. In the management of many species such studies 
have been given priority , With deer although a considerable 
volume of data is available in many states and provinces, interpre- 
tations so far seem to have been limited in scope. The reason for 
this may be that samples of deer taken by hunters are not random. 
It is evident from examination of checking station data that 
numerous biases are present so that before interpretation can begin 
it is necessary to discover where they occurs measurement of their 
extent must then be made before correction factors can be worked 
out. The purpose of this paper is to describe and discuss some 
of the distortions present in the Ontario data. 

Acknowledgment is made here of the contribution made by 
the staff of the Districts who ran the checking stations and under- 
took many field surveys. In the course of discussion with many 
people ideas have been absorbed by the writer which have been 
incorporated here. Specific acknowledgment of such help would be 
impossible, however, the writer wishes to record appreciation for 
special help given by Dr. C. D. Fowle, Mr. R. L. Hepburn and 
Mr. R. C. Passmore and to Mr. C. Ducharme who drew the graphs. 
Mr. V. Gunvalson of the Minnesota Department of Conservation 
kindly gave permission for the writer to use deer kill curves 
from that state. 

In 1951 the first age determinations of deer were made 
by Mr. R. C. Passmore in the Western Region. Since then similar 
information has been collected in fourteen Districts so that figures 
for five years are available from the Western Region and for four 
years from most of the eastern part of Ontario. In the kill 
curves used in this paper fawns have been omitted because we know 
that they are not always taken by hunters according to their 
availability (1). It is sometimes easier to understand kill curves 
of this kind, if comparisons are made with calculated kill curves 
with known mortality rates. For use in this case seven have been 
constructed with mortality rates varying from 20% to 80%. Herein- 
after these will be referred to as "theoretical" kill curves while 
the real ones will be called "field" kill curves. For comparative 
purposes all the age distributions have been converted to percentages 
and have been plotted on semi-logarithmic paper. 

Figure No. 1 gives the seven theoretical kill curves 
and it will be seen that they have certain characteristics in 
common. 

1. Each kill curve plots as a straight line instead of a curve 
which would appear if ordinary graph paper were used. 



- 42 - 

2. The age classes appear equidistant from one another on each 
kill curve. 

3. The higher the mortality rate the wider apart the age classes 
are spaced. 

4. The higher the mortality rate the steeper the slope of the 
line appears. 

Figure No. 2 presents a field kill curve for each year 
from 1952 to 1955 for Lindsay, Tweed, Pembroke, Parry Sound, North 
Bay, Sudbury and Manitoulin Island combined. It is realized that 
in any one year variations occur in the age structure of the deer 
populations occupying different parts of this large area. Samples 3 
however, from single Districts for one year were hardly large enough 
to form a basis for appraisal. 

Figures No. 3 and 4 present the field kill curves for 
the Western Region for each year from 1951 to 1955 • Certain 
characteristics stand out when these field kill curves are examined. 
Unlike the standard kill curves of Figure No. 1 not one of them 
appears as a straight line. This is not unexpected since we know 
that recruitment is not constant each year and that mortality also 
varies. The most striking characteristic is perhaps the tendency 
in each case for the line to curve off at the top to the left, 
indicating an annual relative scarcity of yearling and 2j year old 
deer in the sample. Numerous explanations of this are possible 
if it is assumed- that the sample of the kill which we check is 
truely random and reflects accurately the age composition of the 
deer herd. All, however, would involve a major change in mortality 
rate beyond 3i years of age and either declining recruitment or 
heavy mortality from causes other than hunting in the younger age 
classes. There is, however, abundant evidence from other sources 
which contradict these suggestions so that other explanations must 
be sought. 

It seems probable then that we do not sample the deer 
herd at random and that various forces are at work which distort 
the picture we get from the checking stations. 

Some of the factors which may cause distortion are listed 
heres 

1. Sampling errors on the checking stations. 

2. Hunter selection. 

3. Errors in age determination. 

4. Variation in escape behaviour between young and old deer. 

5. Hunting methods. 

Sampling Errors On The Checking Stations 

It is possible that we do not check a random sample of 
the kill on the checking stations. This could arise from a number 
of circumstances. Deliberate avoidance of the checking station by 
hunters with deer they did not wish Department staff to see is one. 



- 43 - 

This is, however, unlikely since any deer is legal game in Ontario 
and there is no special stigma attached to those killing fawns 
or does. There is some evidence in certain areas that avoidance 
of long established checking stations does take place, but this 
is usually due to unwillingness to "waste" time while the deer 
are being checked and questionnaires filled out. It is unlikely 
that deer missed in this way are different in age composition to 
those examined. If the composition of the kill changed as the 
season progressed distortion might occur if checking was only 
carried out at one period. In the Western Region checking has 
been carried out at intervals throughout the long season while in 
Eastern Ontario the hunters habit of returning on weekends ensures 
that the weekend checks sample deer killed at all times during the 
hunt. It seems unlikely that the sample checked on the stations 
is not a random sample of the kill. 

Hunter Selection 

It was mentioned earlier that there is evidence that 
hunters do not take fawns according to their availability. If 
hunters also discriminate against yearlings and 2\ year old deer 
the distortion apparent in the kill curves could be accounted for. 
Discrimination against these young deer implies recognition of age 
classes in the bush and this raises the question - how? 

In Ontario yearling bucks average from 30 to 35 lbs. 
lighter (dressed weight) than those 2\ years of age. This with 
inferior antler development could be used to make distinctions. 
The differences between 2\ and older deer are less apparent. 
Field studies and conversations with hunters do not indicate any 
prejudice against taking these young deer and indeed under normal 
field conditions it would be almost impossible to make distinctions 
even if the hunters wished to do so. With does selection is even 
less likely since the average weight difference between yearlings 
and 2g year olds is only about 12 lbs. (dressed weight). Yet with 
does the distortion in the kill curve is more marked than in the 
case of bucks (see Figure 5, D&E). We can probably dismiss hunter 
selection as a cause of the relatively small size of the yearling 
and 2\ year classes in our checking station sample. 

Errors in Age Determination 

The possibility that errors are being made in age 
determination on the checking stations should not be overlooked. 
In October 1954, a course was given at Maple at which most of the 
biologists and wildlife management officers, who were to carry out 
the work of age determination on the checking stations, were given 
instruction and a test. The total error for all who took the test 
was just over 20%. Another course and test given at Tweed in the 
fall of 1955 gave no better results. 

The problem of errors in age determination of deer and 
the soundness of the Severinghaus method was discussed at the 
Great Lakes Deer meeting held at Lutzen, Minnesota on February 
14th, 15th and 16th, 1956. Switzenberg from Michigan displayed 
some jaws from known age deer killed at Cusino. He felt that 
90% to 95% matched up well to Severinghaus' descriptions. There 
appeared to be very little variation in wear in \\ and 2\ year 
old deer but after this some overlapping occurred. Occasionally 
extreme deviations are encountered, one jaw from a 



- 44 - 

12g year old doe showed a degree of wear that most workers would 
have considered fairly typical of a 7i« 

The fact that variation in wear occurs should not destroy 
the value of age data derived from checking stations provided 
determinations are carefully made. 

Mr. A. P. Boyce of the Michigan Department of Conservation 
kindly gave the writer some figures relating to errors in age 
determinations made by some of their staff in 52 tests on 50 deer 
jaws each. The total error amounted to 22.6%. 

Table No. 1 gives the numbers in each age class in which 
the age was over - or under - estimated. 

TABLE NO. 1 - Errors in Age Determination of Deer Jaws In Michigan 

1* 2i_ 3i_ 4i_ 5L. 6JL 2i 

Jaws aged 1144 572 312 260 156 104 52 

Total incorrect 74 176 91 36 32 60 20 

Percentage incorrect 6 30 29 33 53 53 33 

Total aged older 74 163 53 43 43 14 2 

% aged older 6 23 17 17 23 13 4 

Total aged younger 13 33 39 39 46 13 

% aged younger 3 12 16 25 44 34 

It will be seen that the error in yearlings is very 
small. Indeed there is no excuse for mistakes with this age class 
for there are so many excellent diagnostic characters available. 
It is extremely unlikely that the apparent scarcity of yearlings 
in our kill curves is due to errors in age determination. 

Two types of error stand out in these Michigan tests both 
of which would have a profound effect on the composition of a kill 
curve. Firstly, there was a tendency to place many deer with wear 
characteristics of 2\ year olds in the 3t year class. This error 
amounted to 13% which is a very considerable proportion of this 
age class. The effect of this error on a kill curve would be to 
pull down the total percentage of the 2j year class and boost the 
size of the 3i group. This would affect the relative positions 
of the 2^, 3 2 & n & 4! year groups in the kind of kill curve plots 
appearing in Figures 2, 3 and 4. If the right correction was 
applied to any of the kill curves for eastern Ontario and to those 
for 1954 and 1955 for the Western Region the 2j, 34 and 4s age 
classes would appear in the plots very nearly in a straight line. 

The Western Region kill curves appearing in Figures 
No. 3 and 4 differ very greatly from those of eastern Ontario and 
provide a most interesting illustration of the use that can be 
made of this type of data. Mr. R. C. Passmore's studies (1) in the 
Western Region indicated that the year classes of 1949 and 1950, 
(i.e. the deer fawned in those years) had suffered severe mortality 



- 45 - 

due to depleted winter range and the hard winters of 1949-50 and 
1950-51, The 1951 kill curve indicated shortages of these two 
classes which were then l'J and 2| years old. It will be seen that 
this hole in the age structure of the population can be followed 
through 1952, 1954 and 1955 when they reached the ages of 5§ and 
65 • The 1953 kill curve however does not indicate a shortage of 
3 j and 4i year old deer which one would expect from the information 
contained in the other years. It will be remembered that this 
was the first year that the Western Region staff undertook age 
determination on the checking stations, perhaps errors were made 
due to inexperience. 

Variation in Escape Behaviour Between Young and Old Deer 

One often hears hunters discussing the difficulty of 
bagging certain very large and presumably old bucks which are 
occasionally seen, usually when least expected. This implies that 
wariness acquired by experience could be expected to influence 
the occurrance of young and old deer in the kill. We have no 
direct evidence on this point from Ontario but some interesting 
figures from New York shed some light on this problem. 

Maguire and Severinghaus (2) drew attention to evidence 
which they suggest i.ndicates that yearling bucks are less wary 
than older ones at the beginning of the open season in the 
Western part of New York State and in the Catskill Mountains. 
They showed that the average age of bucks shot on the first day 
of the hunt was significantly lower than it was for those killed 
during the rest of the season and that the percentage of yearlings 
in the kill was higher on the first day than during the rest of 
the season. In the Adirondacks this kill characteristic extended 
to 2\ year old bucks as well and at the same time the percentage 
of yearlings in the kill declined steadily throughout the season. 

The kill curves for bucks for these three New York 
areas for 1946 - 1952 are given in Figure No. 5. The New York 
situation is not strictly comparable to that in Ontario because 
a buck law was in force during the years the data under considera- 
tion were collected. Furthermore, to be legal a buck had to carry 
antlers at least three inches long. Maguire and Severinghaus 
point out that in the Adirondacks an appreciable number (53.3% 
in the 1943 any deer season) of yearlings and even some 2\ and 
3i year old deer do not qualify as legal bucks under this 
regulation. They mention range quality and winter severity as 
the cause. This is not mentioned as being a factor elsewhere in 
New York. They imply that the distortion apparent in the Adirondack 
kill curve was due to this high proportion of yearling deer not 
being legally available to the hunters. While this factor probably 
has affected the age distribution as suggested, it has also 
obscured any effect that other factors might have had on the 
occurrance of yearlings in the kill. 

The Ontario data suggest that an additional unknown factor 
is operating to reduce the occurrance of yearlings (particularly 
does) in the kill. While it is possible that there is a change in 



- 46 - 

the frequency of yearlings as the season progresses, they are 
probably at all times less vulnerable to the gun than older deer. 

The kill curves from the Western Region of New York and 
the Catskills are of interest. Their average mortality rates are 
about 10% and 60% respectively. Hunting pressure in these areas 
is much heavier than anywhere in Ontario and the harvest of bucks 
much more thorough. Such high mortality rates can probably be 
sustained indefinitely as long as the doe component of the herd 
remains productive . 

Further evidence on differential vulnerability of some 
segments of the Ontario herd is provided in the sex ratio data 
from the checking stations. 

Table No, 2 gives the sex ratios by age class for 1952 
to 1955 for the Province. It is not possible to say at this time 
to what extent these are truely representative of the actual 
condition in the herd. Highway kill data suggest that during the 
rut deer fall victims more frequently than at other times of the 
year and that bucks are far more vulnerable than does. 

The hunting season coincides with the rut in most parts 
of Ontario so that there is a possibility that sexual activity 
may be a distorting factor in the sex ratios of deer taken by 
hunters. It will be seen that in the five youngest age classes 
bucks exceed does in the kill. Beyond the 4i year age class there 
is an excess of does which becomes progressively more marked with 
age. 

A chi-square test was applied to these figures to 
determine the significance of the apparent differences. The 
heavy preponderence of bucks in the yearling class attracts 
attention. There was a highly significant difference between this 
ratio and that expected from the whole range of data. 

Since the 2j year Class ratio did not differ significantly 
from that of fawns one can conclude that the relative scarcity of 
yearling does was duetoabias in sampling and is not representative 
of conditions in the herd. There was also a highly significant 
difference in the ratios of the 5i year class and the 6J+ age class 
from the expected ratio. Whether this also is caused by a bias 
due to bucks acquiring greater wariness than does in old age or 
whether it is a true reflection of the actual ratio in the herd 
is uncertain at present. 



- 47 - 



TABLE NO. 2 - Sex Ratios of Deer by Age Class for Lindsay, Tweed, 
Pembroke, Parry Sound, North Bay, Sudbury, 
Manitoulin, Sault Ste. Marie, and the Western 
Region, for 1952 to 1955 from Checking Station Data, 



Fawns 
4? 

5? 



c?c? 



1664 




1900 




1438 




1071 




455 




171 




76 ) 




46 ) 


151 


29 ) 




6900 





2$ 



1443 




1353 




1365 




883 




360 




211 




119 ) 




89 ) 


266 


5S ) 




5886 





Ratio 



115s 100* 
140s 100 
109s 100 
121s 100 
126s 100 

81s 100 

64s 100 ) 

52s 100 ) 57s 100 

50s 100 ) 

117s 100 



x 



1954 fawn ratios not available for inclusion. 



Hunting Methods 

In Ontario there is one basic difference in the manner 
in which we hunt deer from the states in the Great Lakes Region. 
We permit the use of dogs. Hunter opinion and the extent of dog 
use has been frequently measured in the province. Generally 
speaking there is a decline in their use and in hunter acceptance 
of them from east to west. 

One frequently hears discussion among hunters on the 
effect the use of dogs has on deer and on the composition of the 
kill. One sometimes hears of cases where hounds lacking in courage 
have been chased yelping out of thick cover by a large buck. It 
is doubtful if this happens often enough to affect the rate of 
occurrance of large bucks in the bag. 

Some hunters complain that young deer, particularly fawns 
are more easily killed with the use of dogs. The kill of fawns 
has already been mentioned and the evidence concerning yearlings 
discussed earlier indicates that they also are less vulnerable 
than older deer in Ontario. There is evidence that this is not 
so everywhere. In Minnesota, the use of dogs is prohibited. 
Hunting pressure is very similar to that in eastern Ontario, about 
2/3 of the 80,000 square miles in the stated is open to deer 
hunting and about 170,000 hunters buy licences. Unlike the other 
states in the Great Lakes Region they have been shooting "any 
deer" without restrictions for many years. 

Four of their field kill curves for 1954 and 1955 have 
been reproduced in Figure 6. The sexes have been plotted 
separately. Their data indicate that yearling bucks constituted 
45 to 50% of the kill while in Ontario they average about 36%. 
With yearling does the Minnesota percentages run between 31 and 35% 
while in Ontario they average about 30%. It is possible that the 



- 48 - 

use of dogs is the factor responsible for this difference in the 
rate of occurrance of yearlings in the kill. Confirmation of 
this must await further studies. 

In commenting on errors in age determination in Minnesota 
at the Great Lakes Deer Meeting, Mr. V. Gunvalson mentioned that 
he thought some of his staff were over estimating age in the 2\ 
age class. This might account for the relative scarcity of 2\ 
year old deer in three of the four curves presented. 



Literature citeds 

(1) Passmore, R. C° Interpretation of survival curves for 
populations of White-tailed Deer. Unpublished report. 

(2) Maguire, H. F. and C. W. Severinghaus, 1954s Wariness 
as an influence on age composition of White-tailed Deer 
killed by hunters. New York Fish and Game Journal, 
Vol. I (1);98-109. 



a,t 


><f 


























, 1 


)/fcr 










hlb'UKL NU CALCULATED AGL 
DISTRIBUTION FOR MORTALITY 

RATES VARYING FROM 20^ 

TO 80^ 


1 ? 


1 f 4- 


fif 


J5S 










1 1 J" 


\ li* 


S( 


)% 










\ 


\ l4 


■ .if 


i# 








\ 




■ f i 

\ 1 Jr. 


J/u 


IT 7 




















\ 




\ ' ?1 


\ 1 Jr. 


3/<5 


PC 


\% 












PERCENTAGE IN EACH AGE CLASS 
OF TOTAL KILL 




2jJ 


2±\ 


2i) 


V 2 

V sj) 


\ 2^ 


S 1 X 


i/v 












2*1 






\ 








2> 




















3j) 


3^ 


3£> 




3J> 
















\ 








4^ 




4 J>. 












\ 


3i ] 












^2 




















4* * 








^ 






\ 














5±\ 














3£* 


f 




^ 












6J> 










\ 




'? 




5$ 




fiA 




























U J 












3±J 






4±1 




5±J 




6^ 




7^ 


























\ 




8 j>> 




A 


GE IK 


YEAR 


S \ 


4p 




5^ 


\ 


6 j3 




7£ 




\ 













































FIGURE NO 2 EASTERN DEER RANGE 
FIELD KILL CURVES 






















































IT 

a 




m 
in 
a 








LD 
LD 


















<?2 


,1* 


1*. 


\ 


>i 


















2" 


3Jr\ 




3^. 




3-P 




l2^ 
























°? 




3±^ 










































_) 

< 

(— 
O 

I— 

L_ 
O 

LJ 
CD 
< 

1— 

LJ 
O 

cr 

LJ 
CL 




































!4A 




























1 


{* 




,4Jt 






































4*1 




























































\ 5i 








|5* 














b£ 








Is* 






























l6^ 












AGE 


IN YE 


H'RS 


e* 


l 




V 6 * 

7±> 




B* 


'7* 


yei 


•7* 















1 


F 1 HI IR F 


Mrt o urc 






















FIELD KILL CURVES 










































! 

j 










If) 
0) 






CM 
LD 








1953 
















1* ' 










li i 


\ p £ 










s!* 




^3* 












\ 

i \ 
\ 










2*> 






V* \ 


K 2± 




14* 








P* 












































3*S 




















< 

o 

1- 

L_ 
O 

1- 

LJ 
O 

cc 

UJ 
CL 








V5f 






RX 










































































8* 

i 






























64 N 




17* 


























































5^ 














\ 








8*1 






6iN 


7^ 




AGE 


IN > 


'EARS 








«* 








«* 















































PlbUKL IMU 4 WLilLKIN ULLK KANb'L 

FIELD KILL CURVES 






















































<3- 
en 






0> 
























f* 






























1*' 




^2^ 


13* 






















|3* 
































































, 4Jr 
















_i 

< 

h- 
O 
h- 

U_ 
O 

UJ 
r_, 

h- 

UJ 

o 
cr 






































J~ 


























\ 


























\ 




















^ 






\ 
























H 


\ 




















^) 






7* 


l5* 


























6^ 




«7* 


















AC_ 


IN YE 


ARE 










>8± 





































A 


B 


C 






FIGURE NO 5 A </ NEW YORK WESTERN REGION 

B a New York Catski lls 
C d" New York Adircndaks 
D J Eastern Ontario 
E ? Eastern Ontario 
FIELD KILL CURVES 


1* 










\ '* 






























D 




E 


















^i 


>2* 


1* 




11 




L 5 £ 
















.2* 








^ 


I 34, 


I* B 


3* 










2*1 






J 


















































_i 

_j 
< 

o 

h- 

u_ 
o 

UJ 

< 

h- 
2: 
UJ 


or 

LJ 
Q_ 






3* 






























































I 4 * 














f* 














4*1 
















4*1 
































































5*1 
















5±) 






5*1 


















4*1 






6*> 






\ 




6^ 








/ 


4* 


1 

J YEAF 


fS 






7*S 


8^ 


6* 1 


1 




7*\ 


8*\ 











































FIGURE No 6 MINNESOTA 
FIELD KILL CURVES 


*o 




«0 








"u 

m 












, 1 + 




1* 
































0+ 

o+ 

in 




o 

in 
























CD 




CD 




























,2* 




gi 


?* 










2i\ 




pi \ 
\ 2 ±\ 




3* 






,3* 




\ 




























\ 


























k 4 ± 


\ 




















.4* 








I 5 * \ 






























l4± 




































_i 
sc 

_J 
< 
(- 

o 
h- 

u. 

o 

t- 
■z. 

kJ 

o 

cr 

Ld 

Q. 






>4± 
















.5* 










































5i 












[8* 










5± 










6*1 


















,6i 
















l7± 




AGE 


IN 


YEARS 




7i\ 




6± 


,7* 






>7± 




eA 



- 56 - 

DEER INVENTORY 

DISTRICT OF SAULT STE. MARIE 

1955 

by 
M. W. I. Smith 



Estimated deer population 1954 20,500 

Estimated loss by predation and starvation 500 

Estimated loss by hunting 1955 1,9$4 

Estimated increment • 9,400 

Estimated deer population 1955 • 27,416 

Data on which above estimates are based: 



Estimated loss by hunting 

Non-resident hunters 



612 deer 



This figure is based on a known total of 900 deer exported 
at Sault Ste. Marie in 1955 » From deer checking station figures 
32.1$ or 288 deer were exported by non-residents from other 
districts, leaving the above total of 612 deer. 

Resident deer hunters 1,122 deer 

This figure is based on a known total of approximately 
4,000 resident deer licences sold in the district. Percentage 
success ratio of 28*06% was compiled from deer checking stations, 
deer weighing program, and 77 voluntary returns from the local 
Rod and Gun Club members. 



Farmer deer hunters 



...oe......«a..o... 



250 deer 



This figure is estimated from the estimated number of 
500 farmers 9 deer licences sold, based on a known sale of 195 by 
three issuers of the possible 28 issuers in rural areas, and with 
an estimated success ratio of 50%, 

Total hunter kill 1,9^4 deer 

Estimated Increment" 

Herd size 20,000 

Buck-Doe ratios 1.3:1 or 11,500: 5,500 
Doe-Fawn ratio: 1:1. OS or 4090 : 4,410 

Summary 

Three comparatively open winters have caused a steady 
increase in the size of the herd. While it is realized that 



- 57 - 

population estimates based on kill records are subject to a large 
margin of error, the figure of 10$ kill was used to arrive at a 
population figure of approximately 20,000. Other factors 
influencing this estimate are deer sightings, deer yard surveys, 
and general impressions gained during the past decade. 

The arbitrary figure of 10$ kill was arrived at based 
on deer records from "Michigan Deer" 1949, giving a kill of 
40,000 in the Upper Peninsula from an estimated herd of 400,000. 
While hunter density is much greater in Michigan, our more 
efficient system of an "any deer" season, with dogs, should serve 
to offset this lesser hunter density. 



- 53 - 



SAULT STE. MARIE DISTRICT 




Sault Ste 



Plan Showing - 

Comparative Abundance of Deer, 1955 



§§*$$ - 2 to 10 deer per square mile. 

. ' 20 

1 1 - up to 2 deer per square I — e 

mile. 



Miles 



10 



^ 



20 



40 



* 59 - 

ELK INVENTORY 
DISTRICT OF SAULT STE, MARIE 
1955 



Estimated population e , IS 

Sight records outside of previously known range • 1 

(One bull elk seen in Township 2F, October, 1955 > by James Haugh, 
Department of Highways, Blind River - see attached map) 
No known kill by hunters or predators . 



I 



: 



- 60 - 



SAULT STE. MARIE DISTRICT 




Sault Ste. 



Plan Showing - 
Distribution of Elk, 1955 



- Known range. 
X - Sight record. 



Miles 



20 10 



10 

i—4 sa: 



a 



=£ 



- 61 - 

DEER SURVEY 

SAULT STE. MARIE DISTRICT 

1955 

by 
M. W. I. Smith 



An annual survey of deer hunter success in the Sault 
Ste. Marie District was considerably expanded in 1955» 

The usual ferry dock station was manned only on weekends 
and provided non-resident hunter bag data. Fish and Wildlife 
personnel were assisted by Forest Protection, Timber Management, 
and members of the local Rod and Gun Club. 

A total of 900 deer were exported according to figures 
supplied the Department by the Canada Customs at the ferry dock. 
The numbers checked by Department personnel were 131 deer and 
290 hunters. Percentage of deer exported from other districts 
out of total checked was 32.1% or an estimated 288 of the grand 
total, leaving 612 deer killed and exported from the Sault Ste. 
Marie District by non-residents. Thus we sampled 21.2% of the 
deer exported from the district, and we can compute that the 
total number of non-resident deer hunters in the Sault Ste. Marie 
District in 1955 was approximately 1,361. 

Mississagi Gate Station 

One of the steps in the expanded program was the 
manning of the Mississagi gate for the duration of the deer 
season by two members of the casual staff. Their primary concern 
was to age and weigh all deer brought through the gate. Both 
successful and unsuccessful hunters were checked and data were 
recorded on the usual checking station cards. The hunter success 
in this north central part of the district, which includes portions 
of the 1943 Mississagi burn, was 16. 8%. 

Field Party Mobile Station 

Another step in the expanded program was the aging and 
weighing of deer in the field by the Wildlife Management Officer 
and various assistants, including the District's communication 
technician and one mechanic. 

Hunters contacted in the field and at camps were checked 
for success ratio, and their deer weighed. Cold storage lockers 
were also visited for deer weights. 



- 62 - 



TABLE I - Weights of Deer, Soo District, Season of 1955 



Age 



1 f 

d 

?2 



Males 



Average 
Wt. (lbs) 



No. of 
Animals 



77 
126 
157 
162 
197 
209 



Range 



5 


60-90 


9 


75-175 


10 


115-234 


5 


115-192 


6 


175-211 


3 


165-275 



Females 



Average 
Wt. (lbs) 



No. of 
Animals 



76 

114 

120 

114 



Range 



12 


60-93 


6 


100-150 


12 


100-175 


3 


109-113 



Age Class Distribution 

Total Deer Checked? 259 

Adult Bucks 103 

Adult Does 61 

Buck Fawns 30 

Doe Fawns 44 

Unaged and Unsexed ... 19 



Percentage of Deer Checked" 

Adult Bucks 41.69% 

23.5! 



Adult Does . 
Total Fawns 
Undetermined 



• •00000c* 



oooooooooeoo 



000000*0000 



23.56$ 
6.2 % 



Percentages of Adult Deer in Each Age Class 

Bucks Does 

Age 



No. of 
Deer 



Percent 
of Total 



3! 

J 

5i 


33 




35. 


.19 


23 




25. 


.92 


20 




13, 


.52 


11 




10, 


.01 


11 




10, 


,01 


Totals 


103 








Unaged 


11 








Grand 










Total 


119 










Average 


age 


of 




Adult 


Bucks 


2.07 



No. of 
Deer 



Percent 
of Total 



35 

20 

3 

1 
2 


57.37 
32.73 

4.91 
1.69 
3.25 


61 




3 





69 

Average age of 
Adult Does 2.10 



Sexes Combined 



No. of 
Deer 



Percent 
of Total 



73 


43.19 


43 


23,40 


23 


13.61 


12 


7.10 


13 


7.70 


169 




19 





133 

Average age of 
All Adults 2.51 



Brief description of weather during the seasons Heavy, district- 
wide snowfall November 3. Brief thaw, followed by more snow 
November 15, giving almost continuous snow cover throughout most 
of the season. 



... 



~ 63 - 

Ballot Survey of Residents 

A further step in the expanded program was a mailed 
ballot survey conducted among 9$9 resident deer hunters in the 
Sault Ste. Marie District by the private marketing research firm 
of Elliott-Haynes Ltd., Toronto, 

The list of 9#9 names of resident deer hunters was 
gathered from the licence issuers 9 lists by Department personnel, 
who selected every fourth name, to give a 25% sample, as 
recommended by Elliott-Haynes Ltd. 

This list of names was given to Elliott-Haynes Ltd., 
together with a supply of carborundum stone for gift premiums to 
be used in the mailed ballot survey, as per their recommendation. 

Details of the results of this survey are contained in 
a separate report prepared by Elliott-Haynes Ltd. 

The initial results of the mailed ballot survey revealed 
a success ratio of 32.8%. This figure was revised following a 
telephone survey of 69 non-respondents, to a success ratio of 
30.6%. Buck-doe ratio was 1.6sl. Doe-fawn ratio was Is. 26. 

Other data secured from (a) Rod and Gun Club members 
who provided voluntary returns, (b) field survey party and (c) 
checking stations follows s 

Sex ratio - Bucks-does - 1.3sl (Sample 255) 

Reproductive informations 

Doe-fawn ratio - Is 1.08 (Sample 135) 

Does milking-not milking ratio - Is 1.8 (Sample 56) 

Ratio of guided to non-guided hunters (non-resident) - l.$$sl 

(Sample 285) 
Ratio of hunter success of guided to non-guided hunters (non- 
resident) - 2.6sl (Sample 132) 
Days per hunter per deer (non-resident - Guided s - 11.3 days 

Non-guided s - 12.4 days 
Percent success of non-resident hunters - 43 • 5% 



Resident hunters s 

Total number checked • . . 

Number of voluntary returns (Rod & Gun Club) 

Two deer camp reports 

Combined totals 

Total kill .... 

Percent success of resident hunters 



• •oocoeooooo©eooooo»ooo 

oo»coooo»e»ooooecoQ»ooooocooo 

ooo»«o«oooooooooeo»e»eoeoo«»»o 

oo«oo«*e« 



322 
77 

27 

426 

119 
28.1% 



St. Joseph Island 



St. Joseph Island, with an area of 136.1 square miles, 
is the only portion of the Sault Ste. Marie District with a 
season less than 25 days in length. For the past several years 
the ten-day season has extended from November 15th to 25th. 
Prior to that it was fifteen days in length, extending from 
November 10th to 25th. 



- 64 - 

Although 55%> of the resident deer hunters contacted 
claimed not to have used dogs, they still benefited indirectly 
as the deer are kept in motion to the benefit of all hunters on 
the island. Most of the farmer-hunters use dogs. 

Many of the concession roads located one and one-quarter 
miles apart are cut out, and coupled with extensive shoreline 
and farm clearings, provide numerous opportunities to intercept 
the deer brought out by the dogs. The majority of hunters on 
the island hunt from organized camps or are residents of the 
island, and thus have many years of experience as to the location 
of the best runs. 

These factors tend to bring about an excessive kill, and 
indications are that each year an average season leaves few 
deer alive on the island. However, the population is replenished 
each winter from Michigan as soon as the ice bridge is formed. 
As many as sixteen deer have been seen at one time crossing from 
Neebish Island, Michigan, to St. Joseph Island. 

Statistics on the hunter success include resident and 
non-resident hunters, but excludes farmer-hunters. However, 
a post-season check by Conservation Officer M. Barton gives a 
total known kill for the island of 96 deer. Of that total, the 
kill by resident deer hunters was 40, as per Elliott-Haynes* 
sample, and non-resident 10 based on a sample of thirty resident 
hunters and six non-resident hunters representing a 25% and 21% 
sample respectively. The success ratios for resident and non- 
resident deer hunters on St. Joseph Island were both exactly the 
same - 33 -3%« Therefore, the balance of 46 deer must have been 
killed by farmer-hunters. 

Deer camp reports from two of the organized camps 
(mostly resident deer hunters) are as follows? 



«!R?» 



Camp "A" Camp "B 

No. hunters 10 17 

No. dogs 2 2 

No. deer 3 4 

Days per hunter per deer 16.3 16.25 

Hunter success ratio 30% 23.53 

Summary 

The deer survey was conducted in three separate ways. 
Deer checking stations, field surveys, and a mailed ballot survey 
by the marketing research firm of Elliott-Haynes Ltd. 

One checking station at the ferry dock checked almost 
entirely non-resident hunters and aged the deer. The other 
checking station at the Mississagi gate checked all hunters, and 
aged and weighed deer. The field survey party checked all hunters 
encountered, and aged and weighed deer. 



- 65 r 

Additions to the survey to be done another year should 
include an effort to determine the number of farmers' deer 
licences issued, their success ratio, and a more intensive survey 
of hunting conditions on St. Joseph Island. 

With the total number of deer exported by non-residents 
supplied us by the Customs at Sault Ste. Marie, we are able by 
checking the percentages exported by hunters from various 
districts to compute the total kill by non-residents for the 
Sault Ste. Marie District. 

The resident deer hunting success ratio secured by the 
Department survey was 28.1%. The revised ratio secured by the 
Elliott-Haynes mail survey was 30.6%, making a difference of 2.5% 
in the success ratio secured by the two systems of survey. An 
average of the two different success ratios would give a total 
resident deer kill of 1,174 deer. 

Non-resident deer kill 612 deer 

Estimated farmer-deer kill 250 deer 

Estimated total 1955 hunter deer kill ...... 2036 deer 

Costs of surveys are summarized as follows. 

A. Non-resident survey (Dept. of Lands & Forests .... $ 250.00 

B. Resident survey (Dept. of Lands & Forests) £§0.00 

C. Resident survey (Dept. of Lands & Forests & 

Elliott-Haynes Ltd.) 893 • 00 

The success ratio of resident deer hunters secured by 
the Department survey was 28.1%. The revised ratio secured by 
the Elliott-Haynes mail survey was 30.6%, making a difference of 
2.5% in the success ratio secured by the two systems of survey. 

It would appear, therefore, that by expanding and 
refining the various systems of survey used by the Department, 
an accurate technique can be evolved and carried out by 
Department personnel. 



REPORT 



SURVEY AMONG RESIDENT DEER HUNTERS 
IN THE SAULT STE. MARIE DISTRICT 



* Department of Lands and Forests 
Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario 



January, 1956 



* MPL1 



INITIAL MAILING ^33 - 100?S 



Completed ballets as of the close- 
out J ate (J: 30/53) 

Ballots returned not delivered 
due to insufficient or 
incorrect aaaress 

Ballots of respondents who didn't 
hunt uuo to sickness, etc. 

Ballots not a. -counted for as of 
the -lose-out date 



3D BASE c v 37 - lOOSo 





33. 


44 - 


4.5 


O 


.3 


■ e e 


£5 . 7 



(initial mailing less ballots 
(not delivered or unusable) 

ercentage re turns as of 332 - 7 2. C 

close-out date 



FOREWORD 



During December, 1955 and January, 1955, a 
survey was conducted by mail among 9C9 re- 
sident deer hunters in the Sault Ste, Marie 
District. 

The following pages outline the purposes of 
the survey, the method used to conduct the 
assignment, the returns up to the close-out 
date, charts of the highlights, a brief 
analysis of the results and tables showing 
the answers to each question asked. The 
actual questionnaire ballot is also shown 
at the end of the report. 

In addition, a telephone survey was con- 
ducted among G9 Sault Ste. Marie residents 
whose names were on the list but whose ballots 
had never been received. The results 
are shown in Appendix form at the back 
of this report. 



PURPOSES . . . . 



This mail ballot survey was mainly designed to 
ascertain the proportion of Sault Stc. Marie 
district resident hunters who were successful 
in bringing home a deer. At the same time it 
was possible to determine other important data: 
the approximate number of days spent deer hunt- 
ing during the 1955 season; the township or 
general area hunted; the approximate number of 
deer and moose, if any, seen during their hunt- 
ing days; whether or not dogs were used and their 
opinion on the use of dogs for deer hunting. 



In addition, the telephone survey among oauit 
Ste . Marie hunters who did not return the ballot 
was designed to ascertain their approximate 
proportion of success in getting a deer. These 
percentages can then be projected to th© total 
sample. 



METHOD 



It was calculated that approximately 4,000 resident 
deer licenses would be issued in the Gault Lite. Marie 
District. Prospective respondents were obtained by 
selecting every fourth name from the lists provided by 
the license issuers in Sauit etc. Marie and surrounding 
district. 909 names were procured by this sampling : »e 
method and the initial mailing was done during the 
week of December 12th, 1955. In order to get as 
high a return as possible, and at the same time to 
compensate for the time required in filling out the 
ballot, a carborundum stone was enclosed as a gift 
premium. 



A 24-hour post -card follow-up was made, reminding 
respondents to send in their ballots. Ml those who 
had not returned their questionnaire by January 1st, 
1956, were sent duplicate ballots (in case the first 
one had been mislaid) along with a covering letter 
(see back of report). This technique resulted in 
an exceptionally high return of 72.8% as of the close- 
out date (January 30th, 1955). This sample infor- 
mation is listed in detail on the following page. 



The special telephone survey v/as conducted by 
trained Gault Jte . Marie interviewers employed by 
^lliott-Haynes Limited. A cross-section of Sault 
Ste. Marie hunters who did not return the ballot 
were phoned and asked whether or not they were 
successful in bringing back a deer and whether 
or not they hunted with dogs. These percentages 
were then applied to the total sample, in order to 
project or estimate the probable degree of success 
obtained by the entire group. These results are 
included with the Appendix tables at the back of 
the report. 



* ANALYSIS 



**» 



Of the initial mailing, consisting of 9C9 names, 734 ballots 
(74.3%) were accounted for up to the close-out date of January 
30th, 1956. This figure included 44 mailing pieces which were 
returned by the Post Office, unopened, due to incorrect or 
insufficient mailing information. It is probable that more of 
these will be received due to the fact that the names and addresses 
obtained from the lists of the license issuers were not always 
complete or entirely legible. In addition, 6 ballots were received 
from licencees who did not go hunting because of last minute 
illness or business reasons. By eliminating these 52 entries 
from the original base, it is established that the percentage returns 
of completely usuable ballots stood at 72.8%, at the close-out 
date. These returns are considerably better than those obtained 
by most mail ballot surveys, GQ% being considered a good return. 

(See Sample Page) 

When asked the approximate number of days spent hunting during the 
1955 season, it is established that the average hunter was away 
for almost 7 days. The most popular length of time was five days, 
taken by 15.2% of the hunters, followed by 10 days (12.5%) and 6 
days (10.5%). 

(See Tables I & 1(a) 

The most popular hunting location was Area #3 (see map at back of 
report), in the vicinity of Sault Ste. Marie. This section was 
named by 3S.3% of the respondents and included such Townships as 
St. Joseph Island, Prince, Aweres, Pennefather, Korah, Tarentorus 
and Echo Bay. Area #2 was also very popular, mentioned by 29.5% 
of the respondents. It includes such places as Goulais Bay and 
River, Searchmont, Fenwick, Haviland and Batchawana Bay. Area #3 
followed with 16.0% mentions, mainly comprising Algoma, Blind 
River, Striker and Spragge, The only other area receiving more 
than 10% mentions was #4, which includes Thessalon, Bright, Rose, 
Parkinson, Thompson and Patton. Only 4.7% of the respondents' 
hunted outside of the Sault Ste. Marie District, while a small 
percentage (1.2%) would not specify where they hunted. 

(See Table II) 






tfcMMiw n ■ ii i m i in i Mn i ii i m 






* ANALYSIS (con't) 



When asked the approximate number of deer and moose seen during 
their 1955 hunting days, more than three out of four hunters 
(7S.5%) reported seeing one or more deer, while only one out of 
five (20.4%) saw one or more moose. The average number of deer 
seen per hunter was approximately three (3.4) while the figure 
stood at .5 for moose. When broken down by the number of days 
spent hunting, 65.5% of those who hunted for three days or less 
saw at least one deer and 16.6% saw at least one moose. The ratio 
increased steadily the longer the time spent hunting, with the 
result that 87.4% of those who spent more than ten days hunting 
saw at least one deer and 29.1% saw at least one moose. 

(See Tables III(a)(b)(c) 

The main question on the survey pertained to the degree of success 
experienced in obtaining a deer. Almost one third of the hunters 
(32.8%) indicated that they were successful in bringing home a 
deer. When asked what it was, the ratio was indicated as follows: 
Buck - 55.4%; Doe - 34.4%; Fawn - 8.9%; Moose - 1.3% 

(See Table IV) 

Comparing the relationship of deer kills by days spent hunting, the 
results are very interesting. Those respondents who hunted for 
three days or less had almost the same success ratio as total re- 
spondents (29./% as against 32.8%), which would seem to indicate 
that these hunters broke camp as soon as they obtained a deer. 
Only ltf.8% of the hunters who stayed for four or five days were 
successful, while 41.5% of those who hunted for the extra day or 
two (six or seven davs) managed to bring home a deer. This 
"euccese" percentage staye relatively high for respondents hunt- 
ing eight to 10 days (39.9%) and over ten days (37.9%). 

(See Table IV (b) ) 

The area in which the respondents hunted had a bearing on the pro- 
portion who were successful in getting a deer. In the Sault Ste. 
Marie District it would appear that Areas #5 and #4 had the best 
record (62.5% and 35.5%, respectively), although the base of C for 
Area #5 is an insufficient sample from which to draw conclusions. 
The same holds true for Area #1, where the base is only 23 and the 
success ratio shows as only 21.7%. Areas #2, #6 and #3 are almost 
identical, with 30.8%, 30.3% and 29.1% respectively. 

(See Table IV (c)) 



■■>'•• .. 



* ANALYSIS (con't) .... 

When the hunters were asked to indicate whether or not they hunted 
with dogs, 21.7% replied that dogs were used. Almost four out of 
five (7G.0%) indicated that they did not use dogs, while a 
negligible proportion (.3%) did not specify. The majority of 
hunters (59.1%) are opposed to the use of dogs for deer hunting. 
The remainder either favour the use of dogs (37.4%) or do not take 
sides on the issue (3.5%). It is interesting to note that 11.5% 
of those respondents who used dogs are opposed to their use, while 
23.5% of the hunters who did not use dogs still favour their use. 

(See Tables V & V (a)) 

Comparing the relationship of deer kills by whether or not respondents 
hunted with dogs, it is evident that the use of dogs increases the 
success ratio. Of the respondents who hunted with dogs, 41.9% were 
successful compared with 30.3% for those who did not use dogs. 

(See Table V(b)) 

Considering the special Appendix Table which shows the results of the 
telephone calls conducted in conjunction with the mail ballot survey, 
it would appear that the minority (255) whose mail ballot was not 
received, did not get deer in quite the same proportion as those who 
returned the ballot. G9 Sault Ste. Marie non-respondents were 
reached by telephone, and 24.5% of this group indicated that they 
were successful in bringing back a deer. This figure compares with 
32. C% obtained on the mail ballot returns (see Table IV). In order 
to estimate the probable success ratio of the entire group studied, 
it is possible to apply the percentage of 24 . 5 to the 255 non- 
respondents. Therefore, if the entire group of 255 non-respondents 
had either been contacted by telephone or had returned their mail 
ballot, it would probably have shown that 63 of them had brought 
home a deer. Grouping this figure with the 224 mail ballot respon- 
dents who were successful in getting a deer, and applying this 
projected figure to the actual sample base of 937, it is shown 
that 30.6% of all hunters in the Sault Ste. Marie District met 
with success on their deer hunting trip. 

(See Appendix Tables I & II) 

Applying the same technique to the question concerning whether or 
not dogs were used while hunting deer, it appears that the non- 
respondent group does not make use of dogs to the same extent as 
those who returned the ballot . Out of the 59 non-respondents con- 
tacted by phone, only 13.0% (9) indicated that they used dogs. 
This figure compares with 21.7% obtained on the mail ballot returns 
(see Table V). Applying the percentage of 13.0 to the 255 non- 
respor.dents, it would probably have shown that 33 of these hunters 
had used dogs. Grouping this figure with the 14C mail ballot respon- 
dents who said that they had hunted with dogs, and applying this 
projected figure to the actual sample base of 937, it is shown that 
19.3% of the Sault Ste. Marie District resident deer hunters had 
used dogs while hunting deer during the 1955 season. 

(See Appendix Table III). 



TABLE I 



QUESTION: "Approximately how many days did you spend hunt- 
ing during the 1955 season?" 



BASE 3C2 - 100% 

Three days or less 145 - 21.2 

Four to five days 1S2 - 23.7 

Six to seven days 123 - 1C.1 

Eight to ten days 140 - 21.7 

More than ten days 103 - 15.2 

Unspecified 1 - .1 



AVERAGE NUMBER OF DAYS 5.9 days 
SPENT HUNTING 



TABLE I (a) 



DETAILED BREAKDOWN OF DAYS SPENT HUNTING 



EASE oC2 - 100% 



Days 
1 
2 

3 
4 
5 

6 



9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 

Over 15 days 
Unspecified 



31 


- 


4.5 


4C 


- 


7.0 


GG 


- 


0.7 


5£ 


- 


8.5 


104 


- 


15.2 


72 


- 


10.3 


51 


- 


7.5 


46 


- 


6.7 


17 


- 


2.5 


£5 


- 


12.5 


5 


- 


.7 


29 


- 


4.3 


2 


- 


.3 


23 


- 


3.4 


21 


- 


3 . 1 


23 


- 


3.4 


1 


_ 


.1 



TABLE II 

QUESTION*. "In what township or general area did you hunt?" 

BASE 6S2 - 100% 

Area 

# 1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
Outside of District 32 - 4.7 

Unspecified C - 1.2 



23 - 


3.4 


201 - 


20.5 


2oii — 


39.3 


93 - 


13.6 


C - 


1.2 


10S - 


16.0 



NOTE: Percentages total to more than 100% due to respon- 
dents having hunted in more than one of the designated 
areas . 



See Map at back of report . 



TABLE III (a) 



QUESTION : "Approximately how many live deer did you see during 
your hunting days?" 



BA3E: 

TOTAL 
COMPLETED 
INTERVIEWS 



382 



100% 



BASE : 
HUNTERS 

SEEING ONE 
OR MORE DEER 

522 - 100% 



NUMBER OF DEER SEEN 



1 






121 


17.7 


2 






98 


14.4 


3 






G3 


12.2 


4 






64 


3.4 


5 






44 


6.4 


6 






33 


4.G 


7 






17 


2.5 


G 






14 


2.0 


9 






8 


1.2 


10 






17 


2.5 


More 


than 


10 


23 


3.4 


Didn't sc 


.e any 


deer 120 


23.5 



23.2 

IG.8 
15.9 
12.2 

6.3 

2.7 
1.5 

3,3 
4.4 



AVERAGE NUMBER OF 
DEER SEEN 



3.4 



4.5 






TABLE III (b) 



QUESTION: "How many live moose, if any, did you see during 
your hunting days?" 



NUMBER OF MOOSE SEEN 



BASE: 
TOTAL 
COMPLETED 

INTERVIEWS 



S3 



C2 



100% 



BASE : 

HUNTERS 
SEEING ONE 
OR MORE MOOSE 

139 - 100% 



1 
2 
3 

4 
5 
6 

7 

C 



66 






9.7 


21 






3.1 


21 






3.1 


13 






1.9 


8 






1.2 


2 






.3 


5 






.7 


3 






.4 


lOOSC 


i 54 


3 


79.6 



47.5 

15.1 

15,1 

9.3 

5.8 

1 .4 

3.6 

2.2 



Average Number of 
Moose Seen 



.5 



2.4 






TABLE III (c) 



INSTANCES OF SIGHTING DEER OR MOOSE, 
BY LENGTH OF TIME SPENT HUNTING 



DAYS SPENT HUNTING 

Three days or less 
Four to five days 
Six to seven days 
Eight to ten days 
More than ten days 







SAW ONE OR 


SAW ONE OR 






MORE DEER 


MORE MOOSE 


BASE 


- 100% 








145 


95 - S5 . 5 


24 - 16.6 




132 


121 - 74.7 


23 - 14.2 




123 


93 - 75 . 6 


24 - 19.5 




140 


123 - 33.1 


iiu — Ai> ■ / 




103 


90 - 87.4 


30 - 29.1 



TOTAL SAMPLE: 



522 -70.5 



139 - 20.4 



TABLE IV 



' .'JEST l ON: "Did you bring home a deer this season?" 



BASE SS2 - 100% 

Yes 224 - 32.8 

No 458 - 67.2 



TABLE IV (a) 

QUESTION: (li a deer was brought home) 

"What was it?" 

BASE 224- 100% 

Buck 124 - 55.4 

Doe 77 - 34.4 

Fawn 20 - £.9 

Moose 3 - 1.3 



TABLE IV (b) 

INSTANCES OF DEER KILLS, BY DAYS SPENT HUNTING 









BROUGHT 




DID NOT 








HOME 




BRING HOME 








A DEER 




A DEER 




DAYS SPENT HUNTING 


BASE- 


•100% 










Three days or less 


145 




43 - 29, 


.7 


102 - 


70.3 


Four to five days 


162 




32 - 19, 


,8 


130 - 


80.2 


Six to seven days 


123 




51 - 41, 


.5 


72 - 


5C.5 


Eight to ten days 


14C 




59 - 39, 


,9 


C9 - 


60.1 


More than ten days 


103 




39 - 37, 


.9 


£4 - 


62 . 1 


Unspecified 


1 




— 




1 - 


100. 



(See Table I) 



,u 



TABLE IV (c) 



INSTANCES OF DEER KILLS, BY AREA HUNTED 



AREA 

§ 1 
2 

3 
4 





BROUGHT 


DID NOT 




HOME 


BRING HOME 




A DEER 


A DEER 


BASE - 100% 






23 


21.7 


i o , 3 


201 


30.8 


£9.2 


260 


29.1 


70.9 


93 


35 . 5 


34 .5 


C 


S2.5 


37.5 


109 


30.3 


69.7 


32 


59.4 


40. 6 



Outside of 

District 

Unspecified as 

to area 8 12.5 87.5 



(See Table II) 



TABLE V 



QUESTION: "Did you hunt with dogs this year?" 



BASE 

Yes 

No 

Unspecified 



G02 - 100% 
1<*Z - 21.7 
532 - 7C.0 

9 _ "> 



TABLE V(a) 



QUESTION: "Are you in favour or opposed to the use of dogs in 
deer hunting?" 

TOTAL HUNTERS HUNTERS NOT 

BASE USING DOGS USING DOGS UN8PECIFIEE 



BASE - 100% 



682 



148 



532 



In favour 


255 - ; 


Opposed 


403 - 1 


Deoends on the 


3 - 


locality 




Doesn't matter, 


3 - 


immaterial 





57.4 129 - £7.1 125 -23.5 1 -50.0 
d.l 17-11.5 3G5 - 72.3 1 -50. J 

,4 - 3 - .6 



Depends on the dog 1 - 
Just until snow comes 1 - 
No opinion unspecified 15 - 



.4 

.2 

.2 

2.3 



- 

1 - 
.7 

.7 15 - 



. * 



2.G 



TABLE V (b) 



INSTANCES OF DEER KILLS, BY WHETHER OR NOT 
RESPONDENTS HUNTED WITH DOGS 



BASE - 100% 



BROUGHT 
HOME 
A DEER 



DID NOT 
BRING HOME 
A DEER 



Hunted with dogs 



148 



62 - 41.9 



86 - 58.1 



Did not hunt with dogs 532 



161 - 30.3 371 - 69.7 



Unspecified 



1 - 50.0 



1 - 50.0 



, 



APPENDIX TABLES 



APPENDIX TABLE I 



TELEPHONE CALLS AMONG SAULT STE. MARIE RESIDENTS WHO 
TOOK OUT A DEER LICENSE, BUT DID NOT RETURN THE MAIL BALLOT 



TOTAL COMPLETED TELEPHONE CALLS 09 - 100% 



QUESTION 1: "Were you successful in bringing back a deer this 
season?" 



BASE C9 - 100% 

Yes 17 - 24. b 

No 52 - 75.4 

QUESTION 2: "Did you use dogs while hunting deer this sp 1 

BASE 69 - 100% 

Yes 9 - 13.0 

No 30 - 87.0 



An additional 11 telephone calls were completed but the 
replies v/ere dropped from this sample because the actual 
ballots were received and tabulated in the interim of the 
list being prepared and the phoning completed. 



APPENDIX TABLE II 

PROJECTED ESTIMATE OF DEER KILLS 
IN THE SAULT GTE. MARIE DISTRICT 

BASE 937 - 100% 

Successful in bringing home a deer 2C7 - 30.6 

Not successful 650 - 69.4 



This figure was obtained by combining the mail ballot respon- 
dents who indicated that they were successful in getting a 
deer (224) with the estimated comparable figure (G3) for the 
non-respondents. This latter figure was arrived at by applying 
the percentage of 24.6 derived from the telephone calls among 
39 of the non-respondents, to the total 255 non-respondents. 
The actual procedure is as follows: 



Completed ballots as of the close-out 6£2 

date (Jan. 3Q/5~) 

Successful in getting a deer 224 - 32. C% 



Contacted by telephone 69 

Successful in getting a deer 17 - 24. 6< 



Ballots not accounted for as of the 235 

close-out date 

Estimate of their success in getting a deer 24.6% or 63 
(Obtained by applying percentage of 24.3 
as derived from the telephone contact) 



APPENDIX TABLE III 



PROJECTED ESTIMATE 0? THE USE OF DOGS 
DURING THE 1955 HUNTING SEASON 



BASE 937 - 100% 



Hunted with dogs 181 - 19.3 

Did not hunt with dogs 756 - 80.7 



This figure was obtained by combining the mail ballot respondents 
who indicated that they hunted with dogs (148) with the estimated 
comparable figure (33) for the non-respondents. This latter figure 
was arrived at by applying the percentage of 130, derived from the 
telephone calls among 09 of the non-respondents, to the total 255 
non-respondents. The actual procedure is as follows: 

Completed ballots as of the close-out 682 

date (Jan. 30/56) 



Hunted with dogs 148 - 21.7% 



Contacted by telephone 39 

Hunted with dogs 9 - 13.0% 







Ballots not accounted for as of the 

close-out date 255 

Projected estimate of the use of dogs 

(Obtained by applying percentage of 13.0%, 13.0% or 3_3 

as derived from telephone contacts) 



ELLIOTT- HAYNES LIMITED Marketing Research 



515 Broadview Avenue 
TORONTO 6 - Ontario 



Tuesday, January 2nd, 195G 



MEMO TO SPORTSMEN: 



Just before Christmas we sent you a survey 
ballot requesting some hunting information for the 1955 
season. Wo also enclosed a carborundum stone, in 
appreciation of the few minutes required to fill in your 
ballot . 

As we have not yet received all the replies 
from your area, we are sending you another ballot in case 
yours was mislaid or lost during the holiday season, and 
we would very much appreciate- your filling it in and 
returning it TODAY. 

If, by any chance, you didn't receive our 
first ballot and carborundum premium, please mention 
it on the ballot, adn we will send another one for your 
co-operation . 

Yours very sincerely, 



"W. E. Elliott" 
W.E. Elliott President, 



"This is a sample of the Postal Ballot sent to all correspondents" 
DEER HUNTING SURVEY . . . ELLIQTT-HAYNES LIMITED 



We are conducting a survey among Ontario hunters 
regarding hunting practices and deer appearances and kills dur- 
ing the 1955 season » Your co-operation in answering the follow- 
ing five questions will help improve hunting conditions in 
future years, and the three minutes you spend answering this 
questionnaire Will be greatly appreciated. To show our apprec- 
iation, we are enclosing a carborundum stone that you will find 
useful on your next hunting or fishing trip. 

Yours sincerely, 

ELLIOTT-HAYITES LIMITED 

"W. E. Elliott" 



1. Approximately how many days did you spend hunting 

deer during the 1955 season? ..., days 

2. In what township or genural area aid you hunt? 

3. (a) Approximately how many live deer did you see 

during your hunting days? 

(b) How many moose, if any, did you see? 

4. Did you bring home a deer this season? Yes ( ) No ( ) 

(If Yes) What was it? Buck ( ) Doe ( ) Fawn ( ) 

5. (a) Did you hunt with dogs this Year? Yes ( ) No ( ) 
(b) Are you in favour or opposed to the use of dogs 

in deer hunting? In Favour ( ) Opposed ( ) 



You may sign your name here 
if you wish 



Thank you sincerely for your help with this survey. All infor- 
mation will be treated in a confidential manner. Please fold and 
seal this stamped and addressed form and drop it in the mailbox 
today . 



* CHARTS 



CHART I 



QUESTION: :, r_ppro;::imateiy how many days did you spend 
hunting during the 1355 season.-" 



Three days or Less 



21.2* 



10 



''our to Five days 




23.7% 



Six to Seven days 



iight to Ten days 





Itillt 


H 
















'^<^Sc s v 





ie.iv. 



21.7 0/ - 



10 



More than Ten days 





1 1 

■ 1 

i 


1 ! | 
i II 





15.2% 



Average number of days spent hunting 5.9 days 



Jour co : Table I 



* CHARTS (con't) . . . 



:hart II 



CUE ST I ON: " .^proximately how many live deer did you see 
during your hunting days?" 



Caw 1 or more deer 



7G . 5/o 



didn't see any deer 



1111! 1 



2o.5/o 



.USoTIQN: "How many live moose, if any, did you see during 
your hunting days ; " 



Jaw 1 or more moose 



Didn't see any moose 



M 



III 



.U-U 



i! 79. '5% 



Source: Tables III (a) and III (b) 



* CHARTS (Con't) 



CHART III 



QUESTION: 'Did you briiir home a doer this season?" 



I I I I I 1 



Yes 
32 . u/u 



HO 

£j7 ■ £~io 



QUESTION: (If a deer was brought home) 

' .hat was it : 



Buck 



//'/A 




/ . 




VTT?, 



55.4^ 



10 



Joe 




14.4% 



i awn 




8 . 9 " 



to 



Moo so 



. O/O 



Source : Tables IV and IV (a) 



* CHARTS (Con't) 



:hart iv 



INSTANCES GF DEER KILLS 



Analysed by Days Spent Hun t i n g 



Total Deer Kills 



o2i ,c> /o 



Hunted for Three 
aays or Less 






29.7% 



Kuntea Four to 
Five days 




19.8% 



Hunted Six to 
Seven Jays 



Hunted Eight to 
Ten Days 




41.5% 



39. 



Hunted more than 
Ten days 



37.3% 



Jource: Tables IV and IV (b) 



* CHARTS (con't 



CHART V 



QUESTION: " Did you hunt v/ith dogs this year?" 



._ 



Yes 
21.7% 



Ho 



r C.Q% 



Unspecified 

. 3% 



INSTANCES 0? DEER KILLS, EY WHETHER OR NOT RESPONDENTS HUNTED V/ITH 

DOGS 



Total Hunters 
who got a deer 




adi „ <_> , 



Hunted with dogs 
and got a deer 





H 



41.9% 



Did not hunt with 
dogs but got a 
deer 




30.3% 



Source: Tables v and V(b) 



SAULT STE MAR 




PLAN SHOEING 

AP.SAS FOR BREAKDOWN OF 

DEER HUNTER SURVEY DATA 

VII - Area for all non-District Data